Morten v. Domestic Telegraph Co.
New York Supreme Court
Motion for security for costs. Action was commenced by the plaintiff, Alexander Morten, to recover balance due for services rendered. The answer was a general denial, and payment. After the case was on the short cause calendar, and had been adjourned once or twice, and finally set down for November 10, defendant’s attorney discovered that plaintiff was an Englishman, and has been ordered by his physician to return to England for the benefit of his health.
Read the full summary
Motion for security for costs. Action was commenced by the plaintiff, Alexander Morten, to recover balance due for services rendered. The answer was a general denial, and payment. After the case was on the short cause calendar, and had been adjourned once or twice, and finally set down for November 10, defendant’s attorney discovered that plaintiff was an Englishman, and has been ordered by his physician to return to England for the benefit of his health. When the case was called on November 10, the defendant’s counsel applied for and obtained a further adjournment to the 17th of the month.…
1Opinion of the CourtLawrence, J.
I think that section 2 of the Revised Statutes, part 3, chapter 10, title 2, contemplates an actual removal by the plaintiff, after the commencement of the action, before he can be compelled to file security for costs (see Gilbert v. Gilbert, 2 Paige, 603).
Motion deMed.
Ho appeal was taken.
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Gilbert v. B. & B. F. GilbertNew York Court of Chancery · 1831