Klopfer v. Werber

Hammond, C. J., delivered the opinion of the Court. In Werber v. Klopfer, 260 Md. 486 , we reversed the judgment Klopfer had obtained in his suit for libel against Werber. The mandate contained the notation “Judgment entered in favor of the appellant [Werber] against the appellee [Klopfer] for costs in this Court and in the court below.” Maryland Rule 882 provides: “In all cases in this Court the awarding of costs shall be in the discretion of this Court, but unless it is otherwise ordered by this Court costs shall be awarded against the losing party.” Rule 832 says that: “Within ten (10) days, after the filing of a party’s last brief, the party shall file with the Clerk, and serve on each counsel of record on the opposite side, a statement of printing costs which shall show the costs of printing the party’s brief and appendix, printed extract or reply brief, if any, itemized to indicate print ⁴²¹ ing cost per page, cost of covers, any additional time, or the like, and the total cost of printing.” Counsel for Werber did not follow the directions of Rule 832; indeed, we inferred from his oral argument that his acquaintance with that Rule had begun a few hours earlier. As a result when the Clerk, following the procedures of Rule 876, sent out the mandate thirty days after the filing of the opinion (paragraph b of Rule 876) the statement of costs called for by paragraph c of Rule 876 did not show the cost of Werber’s brief ($836.88) — the notation on the mandate in the space that customarily would have had a dollar figure was “not supplied,” and did not contain an item of $40.00 of lower court costs paid by Werber.

We were moved by Werber to amend the mandate and we refused to do so for the reason that he had been the author of his own misfortune in attempting to sail the Maryland appellate seas without using the compass of the Rules. He thereupon filed a