Schmidt v. Eiseman
New York City Court
Appeal from an order denying defendant’s motion to require the plaintiff to file security for costs. Action to recover the sum of $2,000 for washing, ironing, cooking and housework for a period covering four years, claimed to have been rendered by the plaintiff to the defendant’s decedent.
1Opinion of the Court
Clement, Ch. J.
This action was brought to recover for labor and services alleged to have been performed for Gertrude Sober, of whose estate the defendant is executor. Defendant applied at Special Term for an order requiring the plaintiff to give security for costs under section 3271 of the Code. The motion was denied, and an appeal was thereupon taken.
Security for costs, under this section, may be granted or refused in the discretion of the court, although there is no proof of bad faith. Tolman v. R. R. Co., 92 N. Y. 353. The counsel for appellant invokes the rule suggested in Caccavo v.…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Tolman v. Syracuse, Binghamton & New York RailroadNew York Court of Appeals · 1883
- Caccavo v. Rome, Watertown & Ogdensburg RailroadThe Superior Court of the City of New York and Buffalo · 1891