
    Norman C. Raff et al., Plaintiffs, v. Koster, Bial & Co., Defendant.
    (Supreme Court, New York Special Term,
    March, 1899.)
    Costs —Taxation, where affidavit fails to show that items are “ reasonable in amount.”
    A county clerk in taxing a bill of costs, accompanied by an affidavit as to the necessity but not as to the-reasonableness of the items of disbursement therein, may disallow items of charge for printed papers because they are not satisfactorily shown to be “ reasonable in amount ”, but he is not authorized, because from his own knowledge of the subject he believes the charge to be excessive, to reduce the amount thereof.
    Motion for a new taxation of costs.
    Isaac Fromme (Campbell E. Locke and Edward W. S. Johnston, of counsel), for motion.
    James Harold Warner, opposed.
   Giegerich, J.

Upon taxation of the costs after an appeal the clerk reduced the items claimed for printing disbursements in a substantial amount, the reduction being based solely upon the taxing officer’s own view as to the proper charge for printing, after his examination of the printed, papers. The bill of costs was verified as to the necessity of the disbursements, but not as to the reasonableness of the items thereof; and the printer’s bills were produced in support of the items for printing, While the taxing officer was warranted in disallowing the items as presented, because they were not satisfactorily shown to be reasonable in amount,” in conformity with the requirements of section 3267 of the Code of Civil Procedure, he had no authority, in the absence of proof, to allow the sum he did therefor. Comy v. Mayor, 1 Civ. Pro. 306, 317; Lottin v. Krakaer, id. 312, 313; note s. c., 1 City Ct. Rep. 60, 61. As the matter now stands, there is nothing to support the action taken by the clerk. Therefore, a new taxation is ordered before him upon such affidavits as to the reasonableness of these items as the parties may present.. The item of $10 for costs paid by' the defendant upon the motion which was the subject of the appeal was properly disallowed. No costs of this motion to either party.

Ordered accordingly,  