Legal Opinion
Ball v. Randall
New York County Courts
Decided October 15, 1914Published
Motion for security for costs on the ground that since the commencement of this action plaintiff has ceased to be a resident of the county of Nassau.
1Opinion of the CourtNiemann, J.
The plaintiff makes the following
statement in his affidavit submitted in opposition to this motion, upon the question of his residence:
“ That at the time of the collision as aforesaid, the plaintiff was a resident of the village of Freeport, Nassau County, N. Y., residing on Ray Street, in said village. That on the first day of September, 1914, he closed up his Ray Street house on account of his business, which is that of a theatrical man, because at no time during the winter can plaintiff tell just where he will be. Deponent, therefore, can have no permanent residence, until the late spring…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Frost & Dickinson v. BrisbinNew York Supreme Court · 1837
- In re WrigleyCourt for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors · 1831
- Bell v. . PierceNew York Court of Appeals · 1872
- Douglas v. Mayor of New YorkThe Superior Court of New York City · 1853
- Bartlett v. Mayor of New YorkThe Superior Court of New York City · 1851
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.