Legal Opinion

Melbourne v. Egbert

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Decided March 15, 1899Published

Ajppeal by plaintiff from a judgment of the Municipal Court, first district, New York city, entered in favor of defendant.

1Opinion of the CourtMacLean, J.

At the trial of this action, the attorney for the defendant moved to dismiss the complaint because of failure to file security for costs, the plaintiff being a nonresident. The justice granted the motion “ because of plaintiff’s noncompliance with the order of the court that he file a bond for costs.” Mo such order appears in the return, and if made it was improper, because the plaintiff was entitled to sue by what is commonly called a long summons, in which security for costs was not required under the former practice (Glass v. Place, 5 Daly, 110), nor is it now required under sections 1298…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Glass v. PlaceNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1874

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API