Legal Opinion

Tubbs v. Hall

New York Court of Common Pleas

Decided September 15, 1871Published

Motion for leave to discontinue. This action was brought by George W. Tubbs against William F. Hall.

1Opinion of the CourtJ. F. Daly, J.

Although the defendant has interposed a counter-claim, the plaintiff has the right to discontinue (Oaksmith v. Sutherland, 4 Abb. Pr., 15; S. C., 1 Hilt., 261; Pacific Mail Steamship Co. v. Leuling, 7 Abb. Pr. N. S., 37; Seaboard & Roanoke R. R. Co. v. Ward, 1 Abb. Pr., 46; S. C., 18 Barb., 595). The question remains, can the court, in a proper case, order the plaintiff to pay defendant an extra allowance under subdivision 2 of section 309 of the Code, in addition to defendant’s taxable costs, as a condition of discontinuance. It rests in the discretion of the court to impose even the payment…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. De Barante v. . DeyermandNew York Court of Appeals · 1869
  2. Seaboard & Roanoake R. R. Co. v. WardNew York Supreme Court · 1854
  3. Staiger v. SchultzNew York Court of Appeals · 1867
  4. De Barante v. DeyermandNew York Court of Appeals · 1869
  5. Oaksmith v. SutherlandNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1856

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API