TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Pountney v. Pountney

Pountney v. Pountney, 10 N.Y.S. 192 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1890)
Download
Format
Include

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

Court
New York Supreme Court · State Trial Courts
Decided
May 12, 1890
Judges
Barnard
Citations
10 N.Y.S. 19232 N.Y. St. Rep. 33456 Hun 64732 N.Y. St. Rep. 3351890 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2029
Headnotes
Divorce—Costs—Allowance to Wife. Where a wife has been allowed $100 counsel fees to prosecute her action for a limited divorce, she cannot, after she has succeeded in making out her case, have another allowance. Following Beadleston v. Beadleston, 103 N. Y. 402, 8 N. E. Rep. 735.
Summary
Appeal from special term, Orange county. Action by Mary A. Pountney for a limited divorce from her husband, William Pountney. Plaintiff appeals from an order denying her motion for an allowance for counsel fees in addition to the taxable costs, which motion was . made at the close of the trial, the issue having been decided in her favor.

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

Opinion of the Court — Barnard

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

Barnard, P. J.

The plaintiff recovered a judgment for a limited divorce, with the costs and disbursement of the action. There had been granted previous to judgment $100 for a counsel fee pending the litigation. The court, on application, denied a motion for an additional allowance, upon the ground that no power existed in the court to make such an allowance in a divorce action, and citing Beadleston v. Beadleston, 103 N. Y. 402 , 8 N. E. Rep. 735. The case upholds the decision at special term. We think, however, in view of the fact that $100 counsel fee had been allowed, and no further application made, that the $100 and the costs of the action were sufficient compensation to the plaintiff’s attorney for the trial of the issue in the action. Even if the court had the power to grant an extra allowance, the ease was not one where' such an allowance was called for by anything disclosed by the appeal papers.

Order affirmed, with costs and disbursements. All concur.

How later courts describe this case

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

Cited by 0 cases

No case in this database cites this case.

Authorities cited 1

DepthCaseCited by
Beadleston v. Beadleston, 8 N.E. 735 (N.Y. 1886) 68

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