Crowell v. Bills
New York Supreme Court
Motion by defendants Sigison, Chester and Bonnell for security for costs in an action of foreclosure. • The action was to foreclose two mortgages on the same premises, one given and the other assumed by defendant Bills, both of which had been owned by plaintiff’s testator.
Read the full summary
Motion by defendants Sigison, Chester and Bonnell for security for costs in an action of foreclosure. • The action was to foreclose two mortgages on the same premises, one given and the other assumed by defendant Bills, both of which had been owned by plaintiff’s testator. Plaintiff individually alleged ownership of one by recorded assignment, alleging the moving defendants to claim its ownership by prior unrecorded assignment; plaintiff, as executor, alleged ownership of the other, alleging the moving defendants to claim ownership under a recorded assignment, which he alleged to be…
1Opinion of the CourtLyon, J.
I do not think that Crowell, as executor, should be compelled to give security for costs. Unless he should be, the motion must be denied, although the executor individually is also a party plaintiff, and is a non-residént. McDougal v. Cray, 15 Civ. Pro. 237.
The answer alleges that there are creditors of the estate of Sarah Decker, deceased. The estate must, therefore, be administered for the benefit of others as well as plaintiff Crowell, and as this alleged asset of the estate is a bond secured by a mortgage upon lands within this state, and is substantially the only available asset, the…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Pursley v. RodgersAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1899