Duane v. Rind
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of District of Columbia
Motion, by the defendant, for a rule on the plaintiff, to give security for costs, on the ground that the plaintiff is a non-resident. The facts admitted were that the plaintiff has a large bookstore in this city, and occasionally resides here during the winter, has a «family, and now resides at Philadelphia. His family never has resided here. He has a storekeeper here. The marshal has applied at the store and received pay for fees regularly. See Act Md. 1796, c. 43, § 12.
1Opinion of the Court
THE COURT
(K.ILTX, Chief Judge,
absent) was of opinion that the rule ought to be laid. The act- of assembly, 1796 (chapter 43, § 12), must be understood to refer to the domicil, the place where the party resides, with his wife and children, if he has any.
2Cited by1 opinion
- Miller's Adm'r v. Norfolk & W. R.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Western Virginia · 1891