
    MEAD v. ZIKA.
    (Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department.
    May 26, 1916.)
    1. Appeal and Error ©=119—Municipal Court—Appeal prom Order.
    No appeal will lie from an order granting or denying a motion for relaxation of costs, which can be reviewed only upon an appeal from the judgment.
    [Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Appeal and Error, Cent. Dig. §§ 823-839; Dec. Dig. <@=119; Costs, Cent Dig. §§ 326, 327, 769.]
    2. Courts <@=190(2)—Municipal Courts—Appeal from Order.
    Where no question of the jurisdiction of tfye Municipal Court arises on appeal from its order denying a motion for retaxation of costs, the appeal does not lie, under Municipal Court Code (Laws 1915, c. 279) § 154, subd. 8, providing that an appeal will lie from an order which the court had no power to make.
    [Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Courts, Dec. Dig. <@=190(2).]
    Appeal from Municipal Court, Borough of Manhattan, Sixth District.
    Action by Joseph Mead against Teresie Zika. From an order denying his motion for retaxation of costs in the Municipal Court, plaintiff appeals. Appeal dismissed.
    Argued May term, 1916,
    before GUY, BIJUR, and COHADAN, JJ.
    J. V. Rooney, of New York City, for appellant.
    Charles Recht, of New York City (Sidney R. Fleischer, of New York City, of counsel), for respondent.
   PER CURIAM.

No appeal will lie from an order granting or denying a motion for a retaxation of costs. The order can only be reviewed upon an appeal from the judgment. No question of the jurisdiction of the court arises in this case, and therefore it does not fall within the purview of section 154, subdivision 8, of the Municipal Court Code.

Appeal dismissed, with $10 costs.  