Legal Opinion

Smiley v. Finucane

New York Supreme Court

Decided December 29, 1911PublishedCited by 2 opinions

Action by Ernest H. Smiley, as administrator, against Thomas W. Finucane and others. Motion to set aside order granted requiring security for costs. Denied.

1Opinion of the CourtFoote, J.

The motion is based solely on the papers on which ' the order which it seeks to vacate was founded. That order was granted ex parte by a justice of this court and was the usual order requiring plaintiff to file security for costs as a nonresident of the state under section 3268 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

It is first objected that the case does not fall within section 3268, because, although plaintiff is a nonresident, he sues as administrator, and that hence security for costs can only be required as provided in section 3271; that is, by motion upon notice appealing to the discretion of…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Pursley v. RodgersAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1899
  2. Clarendon v. Milliken Bros.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1907
  3. Pelkey v. Town of SaranacAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1901
  4. Schmalz v. William L. Crow Construction Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1911
  5. Corbett v. BrantinghamAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1901

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Hitt v. CarrIndiana Court of Appeals · 1921
  2. Baum v. Morse Dry Dock & Repair Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1913

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

Powered by the Exa API