Adams v. Stevens
Opinion of the Court
The amount of this bill induced me to obtain the papers from the clerk’s office, to see for myself if it was made out in any spirit of fairness, and if there was any justification for such an excessive bill. I find that it is but a common case, and yet the petition is charged at fifty-four folios, the order at twenty folios, and the whole papers are unnecessarily voluminous. It is such bills of costs as this, that turn upon the legal profession the indignation of a portion of community, and have
It is certainly hardly consistent or reasonable, that while, by our present act, the costs of a mortgage foreclosure can scarcely reach to the sum of twenty dollars, that the costs of a mere supplementary petition for a sale upon the falling due of another installment, should swell to this amount. It is inconsistent, unreasonable, unjust, and oppressive, and this bill of costs must be greatly reduced.
Retaining fee for solicitor and counsel, $8, cannot be allowed. This is not a new, but merely a supplementary proceeding. This charge was allowed in the original bill of costs, and cannot be again allowed, even though a new solicitor is employed. Counsel perusing and amending petition, $2 50, cannot be allowed. The fee bill makes no provision for such a charge. It applies to bills, pleas, answers, demurrers, interrogatories, and exceptions. It does not apply to amendments or to interlocutory petitions in a cause, whatever may be the rule as to original petitions in the nature of original bills.
Draft petition, 54 folios, engrossing and copies.
It certainly cannot be tolerated, that while the fo
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.