From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Ex Parte Hughes

U.S.
May 4, 1885
114 U.S. 548 (1885)

Opinion

ORIGINAL.

Decided May 4, 1885.

The respondent in an original petition to this court for a writ of mandamus which is denied, cannot tax as costs his disbursements for printing briefs: but a docket fee and disbursements for printing objections in the nature of pleadings, are taxable.

Mr. J.N. Dolph for the motion.

Mr. John H. Mitchell opposing.


After announcement of the judgment in this cause, ante, 147, the respondent moved to tax as costs, 1, a docket fee, and 2, his disbursements for printing briefs of counsel, and objections to filing a reply to the relator to the return of the respondent.


It has never been the practice of this court, in cases brought before it under its appellate jurisdiction, to tax as costs disbursements by counsel or parties for printing briefs. We see no reason for adopting a different rule in cases within our original jurisdiction.

A proceeding in this court, under its original jurisdiction, against a judge of an inferior court of the United States to obtain a writ of mandamus requiring him to proceed in a cause pending in court before him, is a civil cause, and a docket fee is, therefore, taxable in favor of the attorney of the prevailing party as part of the costs. The objections to the filing of the reply were in the nature of pleadings in the cause. The disbursements for printing such objections are, therefore, taxable as costs of printing the record.

The motion, so far as it relates to the printing of briefs, is denied, but in all other respects granted.


Summaries of

Ex Parte Hughes

U.S.
May 4, 1885
114 U.S. 548 (1885)
Case details for

Ex Parte Hughes

Case Details

Full title:EX PARTE HUGHES

Court:U.S.

Date published: May 4, 1885

Citations

114 U.S. 548 (1885)

Citing Cases

Ford v. Atlantic Coast Line R. Co.

Action by Katherine H. Ford against Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Company and another. From an adverse order…

Stein v. Expert Lamp Co.

Clearly under such circumstances the defendant cannot now contend the plaintiff was acting in bad faith and…