Legal Opinion

C. & C. H. Sigourney v. Waddle

New York Court of Chancery

Decided January 24, 1841PublishedCited by 1 opinion

Applications were made in behalf of each of the defendants in this cause, they having appealed by separate solicitors, for orders to compel the solicitor of the complainants to pay the costs of two interlocutory applications, theretofore made by the complainants, for the retaxation of the costs of the defendants respectively on the appeal to the chancellor.

Read the full summary

Applications were made in behalf of each of the defendants in this cause, they having appealed by separate solicitors, for orders to compel the solicitor of the complainants to pay the costs of two interlocutory applications, theretofore made by the complainants, for the retaxation of the costs of the defendants respectively on the appeal to the chancellor. The complainants were non-residents of the state, and the bill was filed before the vice chancellor of the first circuit, without any security for costs having been given. Upon the hearing of the cause before the assistant vice chancellor,…

1Opinion of the Court

The Chancellor.

The statute making the attorney of the plaintiff liable for the costs of the defendant, to an amount not exceeding $100, where he commences a suit in which the defendant is entitled to security, without filing the requisite bond, does not appear to extend to solicitors in chancery, in suits commenced here. (2 R. S. 621, § 7, 8.) A similar liability, however, is incurred by a solicitor, in this court, under the provisions of the 16th rule. But the extent of the liability of the solicitor, under that rule, to all the defendants, can never exceed one hundred dollars. If the…

2Cited by1 opinion

  1. Willmont v. MeseroleThe Superior Court of New York City · 1875

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

Powered by the Exa API