Young v. Hughes

• Decision Date: 07 October 1901
• Citation: 39 Or. 586,66 P. 272
• Parties: YOUNG et al. v. HUGHES.
• Court: Oregon Supreme Court

66 P. 272

39 Or. 586

YOUNG et al. v. HUGHES.

Supreme Court of Oregon

October 7, 1901

Motion to retax the costs. Motion granted, and a retaxing ordered with directions therefore.

For former opinion, see 65 P. 987.

MOORE, J.

This is a motion to retax costs. The appellant, having been allowed costs, filed a bill therefor, in which he demanded, inter alia, for printing the abstract, 26 pages, $26; brief, 48 pages, $48; stenographer's fees for transcribing testimony, $40; and for preparing a petition for rehearing $4. The respondent objected to these items, and alleged that the abstract contained only 25, and the brief 47, pages including covers; that a reasonable charge for printing the same did not exceed 75 cents per page; and that the stenographer's fees did not constitute a disbursement which the appellant was entitled to recover. The appellant thereupon filed an amended verified statement, specifically denying these allegations, and for a further answer alleged that he was compelled to serve and file a printed abstract and brief containing 26 and 48 pages, respectively, including covers for printing which an account of $74 was set out; that the cause was tried before the court, stenographic notes being taken of the testimony, and a decree rendered without any transcription of such notes, but, an appeal having been taken, it became necessary to transcribe the testimony for use in the supreme court, for which service he was compelled to pay a stenographer the sum of $40; that after the decision of the cause on appeal he prepared a petition for rehearing, and, not having sufficient time to print the same, so as to present it before an adjournment of the court, he had some copies thereof made by a stenographer, for which he was compelled to pay the sum of $4. The clerk disallowed the latter sum, and also the sum of $1, or one-half the claim for the cover of the abstract, but taxed the other items as claimed, whereupon the respondent moved to retax the items of the cost bill to which he objected.

His motion therefor notifies the appellant that he intends to rely upon certain affidavits, annexed thereto, to the effect that the reasonable cost of publishing the abstract and brief is 65 cents per page for cash, and 75 cents on credit. The appellant moves to strike said affidavits from the files, on the ground that they were filed after the disbursements had been taxed, and that the testimony therein contained was not submitted to or considered by the clerk. In Crawford v Abraham, 2 Or. 163, a judgment of nonsuit having been rendered in the court below, the defendants filed a cost bill, and supplemented it with certain affidavits, showing the necessity of the several items thereof. The court, in construing section 546 of the Code (Gen.Laws Or., as compiled by Matthew P. Deady and La Fayette Lane), which provided that disbursements should be taxed in accordance with a verified statement thereof, unless objections thereto were filed, held that the showing of the necessity for an item of disbursement should be in the form of an amended verified statement, and that no other affidavits would be allowed. Mr....