TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Shay v. Tuolumne Water Co.

Shay v. Tuolumne Water Co., 6 Cal. 286 (1856)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
California Supreme Court · State Highest Courts
Decided
July 1, 1856
Judges
Murray
Citations
6 Cal. 2861856 Cal. LEXIS 128
Syllabus
In an action for damages, where the jury found a verdict for plaintiif for $50, and costs, Held, that judgment could not be entered for costs in favor of plaintiff. The plaintiff can only he allowed costs when he recovers §200 in an action for money or damages. Costs axe incident to the judgment, and cannot he given by the jury by way of damages.
Summary
Appeal from the District Court of the Fifth Judicial District, County of Tuolumne. The only point raised is stated in the opinion of the Court.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Murray

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

The opinion of the Court was delivered by Mr. Chief Justice Murray.

Mr. Justice Terry concurred.

This was an action in the Court below for damages for flooding a mining claim with water. The jury found a verdict of fifty dollars and costs for the plaintiff. All the errors are waived by the appellants, except as to the judgment for costs.

By the 498th section of the Practice Act, it is provided that no costs shall be allowed in an action for money or damages, when the plaintiff recovers less than §200. The recovery spoken of means the damages assessed by the jury eo nomine, exclusive of the costs which they may arbitrarily find. Van Horne v. Petrie et al, 2 Caine’s Repts., p. 213, and The Supervisors of Onondaga v. Briggs, 3 Denio, p. 173. Costs are an incident to the judgment, to be taxed by the clerk or Court, and cannot he given by the jury by way of damages.

So much of the judgment of the Court below, as allows costs to the plaintiffs, is reversed, and the Court is directed to modify it in conformity with this opinion.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1908: 119082026peak 1908 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Dorn & McGinty v. Cooper139 Iowa 742 (1908)

Most recent

  1. Dorn & McGinty v. Cooper139 Iowa 742 (1908)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list