Darby v. Condit
The Superior Court of New York City
Appeal from an order at. chambers, denying, with costs, a motion on the part of the defendant, that the plaintiff should be required to file security for costs. E. F. Treadwell, for appellant, said that by the last addition made to § 317 of the Code, the cotirt had power to require security for costs from the plaintiff in all the cases mentioned in the section.
Read the full summary
Appeal from an order at. chambers, denying, with costs, a motion on the part of the defendant, that the plaintiff should be required to file security for costs. E. F. Treadwell, for appellant, said that by the last addition made to § 317 of the Code, the cotirt had power to require security for costs from the plaintiff in all the cases mentioned in the section. The cases mentioned in the section were suits by an executor, administrator, or trustee, he therefore insisted that in all such suits the court was bound, upon motion, to require the security, provided it appeared that the defendant…
1Opinion of the Court
Oakley, Ch. J.
The section upon which the defendant’s counsel relies declares in terms that an executor, &c., shall not be personally liable for costs, except for mismanagement or bad faith in the action. Ho mismanagement or bad faith is imputed to this plaintiff. It is not pretended that, should he fail in the suit, it is at all probable that a judgment for costs could be obtained against him. By granting this motion, therefore, in the form in which it is made, we shall render the plaintiff personally liable for costs from which the Code declares he shall be exempt. To render him liable upon…
2Cited by10 opinions
- Tolman v. Syracuse, Binghamton & New York RailroadNew York Court of Appeals · 1883
- People v. De Renna, New York County Courts1938
- Hale v. MasonNew York Supreme Court · 1895
- Fagan v. StrongNew York Supreme Court · 1890
- Wilbur v. WhiteNew York Supreme Court · 1878
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.