Fowler v. Stuart
Opinion of the Court
The action was brought to recover damages for malicious prosecution. The case came on for trial at the January, 1921, Fulton Trial Term, and was dismissed on the opening on the ground that the complaint did not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. On appeal the Appellate Division reversed and granted a new trial, “ with costs to the appellant to abide the event.” On the trial following, plaintiff obtained a verdict for six cents and thereupon sought to tax full costs for each trial and for the appeal, in the sum of $294.31, but the clerk taxed them at six cents. Now he is asking that they be retaxed at $121 for the costs and disbursements of the appeal. Prior to September 1, 1880, when section 3237 of the Code of Civil Procedure, now section 1489 of the Civil Practice Act, became effective, costs in an action of this kind were regulated by section 3228, subdivision 3, of the Code, now section 1471 of the Civil Practice Act, and it was held that the event contemplated, upon the grant of a new trial, “ with costs to abide the event,” was one which determined that the successful party was, by law, entitled to costs. Snyder v. Collins, 12 Hun, 383. So that, prior to that time, where a recovery was for six cents, in a case of this kind, all costs, both of trial and of appeal, were limited to that amount. But when section 3237 of the Code, now section 1489 of the Civil Practice Act, became effective, the limitation, prescribed by section 3228, subdivision 3, of the Code,
Ordered accordingly.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.