ANONYMOUS

ANONYMOUS. U. S. Circuit Court for the Southern District of N. Y.; May, 1883. Costs.—Removal of Cause. The successful party in an action commenced in a State court and removed thence, under the statute, to a court of the United States, is entitled to costs both of the proceedings in the United States court, and to all those accrued in the State court up to the time of removal. Motion to dismiss. This action was brought for an accounting in the Supreme court of the State. After issue joined in the State court, the defendant removed the cause to the United States circuit court, on the ground that the parties were citizens of different States. The plaintiff’s attorney died after the removal of the cause; and upon notice given under the State statute to appoint another attorney, the plaintiff failed to do so. The defendant now moved to dismiss the complaint upon the merits, as being an equity suit, with costs of the action. ' B. W. Huntington, for the motion. A suit removed from the State court comes into this court impressed with all the rights and liabilities of parties as to costs, as accrued or attached by the laws of the State while the suit remained in the State court. Acts of Congress prescribing what costs may or may not be taxed apply only to such costs as accrue after the removal has become complete (Wolf v. Connecticut Mut. Life Ins. Co., 1 Flippin, 377; Ellis v. Jarvis, 3 Mason, 457; Field v. Schell, 4 Blatchf. 435; Grier v. Gregg & Wald, 4 McLean, 202; Akerly v. Vilas, 1 Chic. Legal News. 161). In suits commenced in a State court and removed to this court, the right to costs is not determined by U. S. R S. 968, but by the statute of the State (U. S. Mich. Dist. Ct., Scupps v. Campbell, Brown, J., 3 Cent. L. J. 521; citing 4 Mich. [Sawy.]). A State court suit removed to this court carries costs if the State court would have given them, although no costs could have been recovered if it had been commenced in this court (Field v. Schell, 4 Blatchf. 435, Nelson, J., distinguishing Coggill v. Lawrence, 2 Blatchf. 304), because in that case the plaintiff would not have been allowed costs in the State court (See also Kreager v. Judd, 5 Fed. R. 27). [MAJORITY — Wallace, J.,] Wallace, J., granted an order dismissing the complaint on the merits, and ordering that the defendant recover the State court costs up to the time of removal, and statutory costs in the United States court subsequent to the removal.