
    Louis Lapham vs. Charles Almy.
    The insertion in a writ of a statement that the plaintiff “sues in his own right, but with intent to benefit J. S.” does not release the plaintiff from liability for costs.
    Tobt. In the writ the defendant was summoned “ to answer unto Louis Lapham, who sues in his own right, but with the intent to benefit Frederick Slocum thereby, in an action of tort.”
    Judgment was rendered in the superior court for the defendant, and the clerk taxed his costs. The plaintiff appealed from the taxation, not disputing particular items, but denying liability for any and all costs. The superior court affirmed the taxation; and the plaintiff appealed to this court.
    
      L. Lapham, pro se.
    
    
      J. C. Blaisdell, for the defendant, was not called upon.
   By the Court.

The plaintiff does not deny that the general rule is that a plaintiff against whom a judgment is rendered is liable to the defendant for costs. But he contends that he is exempt, because he has inserted in the writ a statement that he “ sues in his own right but with the intent to benefit Frederick Slocum.” This allegation, even if proved to be true, does not, however, make Slocum liable, nor does it relieve the plaintiff.

Taxation affirmed.  