Glover v. Cuming
New York Supreme Court
Motion for judgment of non-pros for not filing security for costs. On the ninth of February last the defendant obtained a rule at the special term of this court, that the plaintiff file security for (he defendant’s costs, and that in the mean time all proceedings on the part of the plaintiff be stayed.
Read the full summary
Motion for judgment of non-pros for not filing security for costs. On the ninth of February last the defendant obtained a rule at the special term of this court, that the plaintiff file security for (he defendant’s costs, and that in the mean time all proceedings on the part of the plaintiff be stayed. The rule was duly served on the seventeenth day of February, and on the twenty-eighth of the same month, the plaintiff, on an affidavit that no security for costs had been filed, gave notice of this motion. On the part of the plaintiff it was contended that such practice was not known in this…
1Opinion of the Court
*296 By the Court,
Sutherland, J.
I consider the practice of the defendant in this case entirely regular, and am satisfied that judgments of non-pros have frequently been granted on similar applications, although no cases are found reported. Cases, however, are reported where such judgments have been granted for the omission of a plaintiff to deliver a bill of particulars, and the proceedings in these cases are deemed strictly analogous ; in neither case can the plaintiff proceed in his suit until he has complied with the order of the court. Besides, no reason is perceived why a defendant, after…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Sheehan v. La Belle Co.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1918
- Osborne v. TullerSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1842
- Hinds v. DouglassNew York Supreme Court · 1865