JOHN KING, AN INSANE PERSON, BY HIS GUARDIAN, ADDIE WILSON KING,
v.
WEIS-PATTERSON LUMBER COMPANY
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
This case is a per curiam order from the Florida Supreme Court addressing a motion to tax costs following a previous judgment of reversal. The court orders the clerk to tax the costs as itemized, certifying them as part of the mandate.
The court holds that the costs to be taxed include the Supreme Court docket fee, costs for issuing and recording the writ of error and incidental papers, costs to procure the writ of error, costs for preparing the transcript of record, and costs for the Clerk's verification of the transcript.
“This cause coming on for consideration of plaintiff in error's motion to tax and allow costs in this case purusant to the judgment of reversal heretofore entered May 14, 1936 (King v. Weis-Patterson Lumber Co., 124 Fla. 272, 168 Sou. Rep. 858), and it appearing that the motion to tax costs was filed at the term at which the case was finally disposed of, it is thereupon ordered that the Clerk do tax the costs herein as follows:”
Establishes the purpose of the order: to consider and tax costs following a prior reversal.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe plaintiff in error, John King, by his guardian, filed a motion to tax costs after the Supreme Court had previously reversed the judgment in his fa…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Costs On Appeal cases and more on FLexlaw
This cause coming on for consideration of plaintiff in error’s motion to tax and allow costs in this case purusant to the judgment of reversal heretofore entered May 14, 1936 (King v. Weis-Patterson Lumber Co., 124 Fla. 272, 168 Sou. Rep. 858), and it appearing that the motion to tax costs was filed at the term at which the case was finally disposed of, it is thereupon ordered that the Clerk do tax the costs herein as follows:
Docket fee Supreme Court______________$12.00
Cost of issuance and recording writ of error and incidental papers in Circuit Court paid by plaintiff in error to Circuit Court Clerk to perfect appeal record----------------- 5.93
Costs paid by plaintiff in error purusant to Section 4618 C. G. L., 2908 R. G. S., to procure issuance of writ of error____________34.55
Cost of preparing one original and one copy of transcript of record, 46000 words______98.30
Cost of Clerk’s verification of transcript — 16.70
All of which let be certified'as part of the mandate in this cause. See: Bay View Estates Corp. v. Southerland, 126 Fla. 239, 170 Sou. Rep. 732.
So ordered.
Ellis, C. J., and Whitfield, Terrell, Brown, Buford and Davis, J. J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Arrie Lee Shuman v. State, 358 So. 2d 1333 (Fla. 1978)…ppel [*1337] late expenditures which are not related to internal operation of the public defender’s office. Costs have been defined to include payments to a court reporter for preparation of a record on appeal. See King v. Weis-Patterson Lumber Co., 127 Fla. 109, 172 So. 693 (1937); Markham v. Gottsegen, 181 So. 2d 594 (Fla. 2d DCA 1966). Section 27.51(4)(e) simply complements Section 27.-54(2) by providing for legislative appropriations for operation expenses of the enumerated public defenders’ offices. We…
-
Abrams v. Gresham, 136 So. 2d 380 (Fla. 3d DCA 1962)…e reason that in a similar situation the Supreme Court treated such a payment as an appeal cost and allowed it in taxing costs following appeal. See King v. Weis-Patterson Lumber Co., 124 Fla. 272, 168 So. 858; and King v. Weis-Patterson Lumber Co., 127 Fla. 109, 172 So. 693.1 Therefore, on the authority and example of the King case, we hold that the able trial judge was in error in failing to include in his order taxing costs the said amount of $107.90 paid by the plaintiff-appellant as a prerequisite to f…
Authorities Cited
- King v. Weis-Patterson Lumber Co., 124 Fla. 272 (Fla. 1936)
- Bay View Ests. Corp. v. Southerland, 126 Fla. 239 (Fla. 1936)