Allen v. Fink

In deciding appeals in this and related actions, we have held that the order denying plaintiff’s motions to compel acceptance of the undertakings as security for costs should be reversed and the motions granted. In view of the time that had elapsed since the undertakings had been executed and an attempt made to serve notice thereof on defendant’s attorney and the fact that there was objection to their form and sufficiency, we gave leave to plaintiff, if he should so elect, to file new undertakings within ten days. (211 App. Div. 411, 416.) It appears he has neither filed new undertakings nor…