Wright v. Black
New York Supreme Court
Motion for an attachment. The plaintiff removed from the state after the cause was at issue. His attorney subsequently noticed the cause for trial, and the defendant had a verdict. At the last term, the attorney was laid under a rule to pay the costs of the defence, to the amount of $100, or shew cause.
Read the full summary
Motion for an attachment. The plaintiff removed from the state after the cause was at issue. His attorney subsequently noticed the cause for trial, and the defendant had a verdict. At the last term, the attorney was laid under a rule to pay the costs of the defence, to the amount of $100, or shew cause. He now shewed for cause, that though the plaintiff had been absent from the state for upwards of a year, that he was soon expected to return, and insisted that at all events he was liable only for the costs subsequent to the notice of trial.
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court, Marcy, J.
The attachment must go ; the absence of the plaintiff cannot be considered temporary, and the attorney must pay to the full amount allowed by the 14th rule of January term, 1799, which is explicit on this subject.
2Cited by4 opinions
- Moncrief v. . RossNew York Court of Appeals · 1872
- Burrill v. JewettThe Superior Court of New York City · 1864
- Dyer v. MontiethCircuit Court of the 48th Circuit of Michigan · 1870
- Roberti v. Methodist Book ConcernNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1859