Opinion
December 1, 1902.
January 7, 1903.
Present: KNOWLTON, C.J., MORTON, LATHROP, HAMMOND, LORING, JJ.
An appeal, by a plaintiff from a decree in his favor on a bill to redeem, because the decree did not give him costs, no ground being shown for his contention, was dismissed with double costs to the defendant from the time when the appeal was taken.
F.M. Davis, for the plaintiffs.
R.G. Kilduff, for the defendant.
This is a bill to redeem from a mortgage. The plaintiffs appealed from a decree of the Superior Court in the usual form, determining the amount due, and decreeing redemption upon payment of the amount within a prescribed time. The only proposition argued is that the decree is erroneous in not giving the plaintiffs costs. But the case shows no ground for the plaintiffs' contention. It appears that the appeal is frivolous and intended for delay. See R.L.c. 156, § 13.
Decree affirmed with double costs to the defendant from the time when the appeal was taken.