Chapman v. Pocock

• Decision Date: 29 February 1884
• Citation: 3 P. 219,7 Colo. 204
• Parties: CHAPMAN and others v. POCOCK and others.
• Court: Colorado Supreme Court

3 P. 219

7 Colo. 204

CHAPMAN and others v. POCOCK and others.

Supreme Court of Colorado

February 29, 1884

Error to district court of Lake county.

R D. Thompson and W. H. Nash, for plaintiffs in error.

H C. Dillon, for defendants in error.

STONE J.

The only question brought up for review relates to the taxing of costs in the case. The plaintiffs were one of eight different sets of attaching creditors who brought separate suits against the defendants in the district court of Lake county. Upon petition of all the plaintiff creditors a receiver was appointed by the court to take and dispose of the goods of the defendant firm for the benefit of the creditors. The goods, when seized by the sheriff under the attachment writs were in the hands of a third party, who intervened in the suits as prior claimant of the property. The suits were afterwards dismissed at the costs of the plaintiffs, according to stipulation, the receiver was discharged, and all the property and proceeds in the hands of the receiver ordered to be paid and delivered to the intervenor. A referee was appointed by the court to investigate the accounts and doings of the receiver, and report his proper compensation; and upon a hearing had upon the report of the referee, and upon exceptions to the report of the receiver, the court approved the receiver's report, and taxed up the costs as follows: the clerk's and sheriff's fees were taxed to each party plaintiff, as the same were incurred by each severally, and the total amount of the fees, costs, and expenses of the receiver, as approved by the court, was divided into eight equal parts, and one-eighth of the whole taxed against each of the eight parties plaintiff. At a succeeding term of the court, and before another judge of said court, defendants moved for final judgment against the plaintiffs for the costs as theretofore allowed and taxed, when a cross-motion was made by the plaintiffs in error herein to retax the costs, so as to apportion the costs of the receiver in proportion to the respective amounts sued for by each party plaintiff, instead of taxing an equal portion to each.

The amounts of the several claims sued for varied from a few hundred to several thousand dollars, that of the plaintiffs in error being $328.80, and the largest of the others being $4,473.67, and it was claimed by plaintiffs in error to be inequitable that each should be taxed a like amount of the...