Barnhart

Barnhart v. Kron

Good Law
1891 Cal. LEXIS 712·88 Cal. 447·26 P. 210
Supreme Court of CaliforniaMarch 26, 1891No. 13233California519 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Harrison, J.

The plaintiff moved the court below to retax the bill of costs filed by the respondent, by striking out each and every item thereof, upon the ground that none of said items were incurred by the respondent in maintaining or establishing any part of his defense to the action, but that each of said items was so incurred *449 by his co-defendant. The court denied the motion, and the plaintiff has appealed.

The allowance or disallowance of items for the expenses and disbursements incurred upon the trial of an action must be left in nearly every instance to the discretion of the judge before whom the cause was tried. He has an opportunity to know the issues that are tried, the character of the prosecution and of the defense, the principal points upon which the witnesses are called, and whether there existed any necessity for calling them. We must assume that he would not allow costs to a party for witnesses that were unnecessarily called, or in a case like the present, for witnesses who were not called for the respondent. There is nothing in the record in the present case which shows that the court did not properly exercise its discretion in refusing to strike out the items objected…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.