From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Douthitt v. Finch

Supreme Court of California
May 31, 1890
84 Cal. 214 (Cal. 1890)

Summary

In Douthitt v. Finch (1890) 84 Cal. 214 [24 P. 929], the Supreme Court affirmed the trial court's award to plaintiff of preoffer costs, stating that "this construction accords with the general understanding of the profession, and with the practice in the superior courts.

Summary of this case from Brown v. Nolan

Opinion

         Department One

         Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of the city and county of San Francisco.

         COUNSEL:

         Tyler & Tyler, for Appellant.

          D. William Douthitt, for Respondent, in pro. per.


         JUDGES: Vanclief, C. Gibson, C., and Belcher, C. C., concurred.

         OPINION

          VANCLIEF, Judge

         This appeal presents only a question of costs.          Before the trial, and after plaintiff had incurred and paid twenty-six dollars costs, the defendant regularly served upon the plaintiff an offer in writing to allow judgment to be taken for five hundred dollars, which was not accepted. Upon the trial the plaintiff recovered only four hundred dollars. The court allowed the plaintiff's cost-bill for the twenty-six dollars, incurred before the offer of defendant to allow judgment for five hundred dollars, but charged plaintiff with costs after that offer. The appellant contends that no costs incurred before the offer should have been allowed.

         The solution of the question depends upon the meaning of the following language: "And if the plaintiff fail to obtain a more favorable judgment, he cannot recover costs, but must pay the defendant's costs from the time of the offer." (Code Civ. Proc., sec. 997.)

         Precisely this language in section 385 of the New York code has been construed by the courts of that state as it was construed by the trial court in this case (Burnett v. Westfall, 15 How. Pr. 432; Magnin v. Dinsmore, 15 Abb. Pr., N. S., 331); and I think this construction accords with the general understanding of the profession, and with the practice in the superior courts, and therefore that the judgment and order appealed from should be affirmed.

         The Court. -- For the reasons given in the foregoing opinion, the judgment and order appealed from are affirmed.


Summaries of

Douthitt v. Finch

Supreme Court of California
May 31, 1890
84 Cal. 214 (Cal. 1890)

In Douthitt v. Finch (1890) 84 Cal. 214 [24 P. 929], the Supreme Court affirmed the trial court's award to plaintiff of preoffer costs, stating that "this construction accords with the general understanding of the profession, and with the practice in the superior courts.

Summary of this case from Brown v. Nolan
Case details for

Douthitt v. Finch

Case Details

Full title:D. WILLIAM DOUTHITT, Respondent, v. JOHN S. FINCH, Appellant

Court:Supreme Court of California

Date published: May 31, 1890

Citations

84 Cal. 214 (Cal. 1890)
24 P. 929

Citing Cases

Shain v. City of Albany

"Section 997 provided that `. . . if the plaintiff fail to obtain a more favorable judgment, he cannot…

Bennett v. Brown

This section has been construed to mean that the plaintiff in an action may recover his costs accruing in his…