Opinion
No. 32934
Decided June 4, 1952.
Mandamus — Assessing costs discretionary with court — Section 12296, General Code — Discretion not abused, when.
APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Lucas county.
By this action in mandamus, originating in the Court of Appeals, relator sought to compel respondent, as judge of a Municipal Court, to allow, sign and make a part of the record a true bill of exceptions or to correct, settle, allow, sign and make a part of the record a true bill of exceptions.
The case came on for trial on the petition, answer, reply and evidence, and the respondent did correct, sign, settle, allow and make a part of the record a bill of exceptions, and the case was discontinued.
The journal entry recites in part:
"It is, therefore, considered and adjudged that no further proceedings be had in this cause, and that same be discontinued, and that the relator and respondent each pay one-half of the costs * * *.
"The court, being of the opinion that respondent's neglect and refusal to correct, sign, and allow a bill of exceptions was not intentional, imposes no fine as prayed for in relator's petition."
An appeal as of right brings the cause to this court for review.
Mr. Orin C. Clement, for appellant.
Mr. Robert B. Konwin, for appellee.
The sole question presented to this court for determination is whether the Court of Appeals was in error in assessing one-half the costs to each the relator and the respondent.
Section 12296, General Code, gives to the court discretion in assessing costs, and the record in the instant case does not disclose an abuse of that discretion.
The judgment of the Court of Appeals is affirmed.
Judgment affirmed.
WEYGANDT, C.J., ZIMMERMAN, STEWART, MIDDLETON, TAFT, MATTHIAS and HART, JJ., concur.