BUNNER v. NEIL, 1 U.S. 457 (1789)
U.S. Supreme Court
BUNNER v. NEIL, 1 U.S. 457 (1789)1 U.S. 457 (Dall.)
Bunner
v.
Neil
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
September Term, 1789
This cause was removed by Habeas Corpus from the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County, and, on the trial, a verdict was found in favor of the Plaintiff, for L4.10.8. which the defendant paid to the Prothonotary, and then moved to stay proceedings, contending, that as the Plaintiff's demand was reduced below L.10. by a direct payment, and not by discount, or set off, the Plaintiff must pay the costs.
The Plaintiff, on the other hand, obtained a rule to show cause, why the Defendant should not pay double costs, under the Act of Assembly, which provides, that, if the defendant removes the cause, and a sum under L. [Footnote 50] is found for the Plaintiff, the Defendant shall pay double costs.
After argument, by Swift, for the Plaintiff, and Tilghman, for
the Defendant, the rule to stay proceedings was made absolute; and
the rule for payment of double costs, was discharged.
U.S. Supreme Court
BUNNER v. NEIL, 1 U.S. 457 (1789) 1 U.S. 457 (Dall.) Bunnerv.
Neil Supreme Court of Pennsylvania September Term, 1789 This cause was removed by Habeas Corpus from the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County, and, on the trial, a verdict was found in favor of the Plaintiff, for L4.10.8. which the defendant paid to the Prothonotary, and then moved to stay proceedings, contending, that as the Plaintiff's demand was reduced below L.10. by a direct payment, and not by discount, or set off, the Plaintiff must pay the costs. The Plaintiff, on the other hand, obtained a rule to show cause, why the Defendant should not pay double costs, under the Act of Assembly, which provides, that, if the defendant removes the cause, and a sum under L. [Footnote 50] is found for the Plaintiff, the Defendant shall pay double costs. Page 1 U.S. 457, 458 After argument, by Swift, for the Plaintiff, and Tilghman, for the Defendant, the rule to stay proceedings was made absolute; and the rule for payment of double costs, was discharged.
