
    Ivey v. Gilder.
    
      Motion to Retax Costs.
    
    1. Returning costs. — When costs are taxed as directed by the court, a motion to re-tax will not lie. If the judgment' is erroneous as regards costs, the remedy is by appeal.
    2. Amendment nunc pro tunc. — A judgment giving plaintiff costs to the amount of damages recovered, and taxing him with the residue, if erroneous, cannot be amended nunc pro tunc at a subsequent term.
    Appeal from Montgomery City Court.
    Tried before Hon. John Gf. Winter.
    Appellant recovered a judgment for $13.50. The court in the judgment entry gave plaintiff costs to that amount, and taxed 'him with the residue. He made a motion' to retax the costs, alleging that the action Avas ox contracta, and, therefore, the entire costs should go against defendant. The motion Avas overruled, and exception reserved. At a subsequent term plaintiff made a motion to amend the judgment, nano pro tunc, to recoArer full costs. This Avas denied and plaintiff appeals.
    Chas. Wilkinson, for appellant.
   McCLELLAN, J.

If the judgment of the city court, giving plaintiff costs to the amount of damages recovered and adjudging the residue of costs against him, Avas erroneous the plaintiff should have appealed. So long as the judgment stood unreversed and Avithout amendment taxation of costs in accordance Avith it was proper, and could not be changed on a mere motion for retaxation. Hence, the court did not err in overruling plaintiff’s motion to retax the costs.

The further motion of plaintiff made after the motion to retax had been denied, and at a subsequent term of the court to amend the judgment came too late.- — ■ Tippins v. Peters, 103 Ala. 196.

Affirmed.  