Podmore v. Seamen's Bank for Savings
Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York
A we at, by plaintiff from an order of the General Term of the City Court of the city of New York, affirming an order of the Special Term of the said City Court, requiring the plaintiff to give security for costs.
1Opinion of the CourtFreedman, P. J.
It has been decided by the Court of Appeals, in Tolman v. Syracuse, etc., R. R. Co., 92 N. Y. 353, that the provisions of the Code requiring security for costs are to be construed independently of the provisions relative to costs against executors and administrators upon final judgment, and that the scope of sections 3268 et seq. is not to be limited by section 3246. It therefore follows that since section 3246 cannot control or affect the operation of section 3271, which relates to security for costs in actions where executors and administrators are specifically mentioned, it cannot control…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Tolman v. Syracuse, Binghamton & New York RailroadNew York Court of Appeals · 1883
- Hall v. WaterburyNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1879
- Tracy v. DolanAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1898
- Hand v. ShawNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1895