Jacks v. Darrin
Opinion of the Court
The question submitted to me in this case is, whether, on a reversal of a judgment of an inferior court, the appellant is entitled to the costs of the court below, which he would have-been entitled to if the proper judgment had been rendered there.
This section has received a similar construction by Judge "Welles, in the case of Estus v. Baldwin, (9 How. P. R., 80).
The court, however, must make such restitution, and it cannot be done as a matter of course by the clerk. The better course probably would be to submit with the appeal p'apers the application for costs, in case of reversal, with the certificate of the clerk below of the amount of costs, and in such case the order could be made on deciding the appeal.
In this case the parties have submitted all the facts, and the order can now be made directing the clerk to include in the bill of costs the ^amount as certified to by the clerk of the Marine Court.
The clerk was right in rejecting the item of costs paid by the appellant on his appeal. That money remains with the court below, and as before stated, is to be repaid by the justice in case of reversal. The respondent has never received it, and it should not form part of any judgment against him.
$To costs allowed on this motion to either party.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.