Hartford Quarry Co. v. Pendleton
New York Court of Common Pleas
Appeal from an order of the special term, denying a motion made by defendant to require plaintiffs (a foreign corporation) to file new s&curity for costs. This action was brought by the Hartford County Quarry Company, a Connecticut Corporation, against John Pendleton. Before answer the defendant noticed a motion to require the plaintiff to file security for costs. The plaintiffs served a copy of a bond proposed to be given by them, executed by two sureties.
Read the full summary
Appeal from an order of the special term, denying a motion made by defendant to require plaintiffs (a foreign corporation) to file new s&curity for costs. This action was brought by the Hartford County Quarry Company, a Connecticut Corporation, against John Pendleton. Before answer the defendant noticed a motion to require the plaintiff to file security for costs. The plaintiffs served a copy of a bond proposed to be given by them, executed by two sureties. The defendant’s attorneys in return served upon the plaintiffs’ attorneys a notice dated September 28,1854, in these words: Gents :—Take…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court.—Ingraham, F. J.
—The plaintiffs filed security for costs pursuant to the statute. The defendant served upon plaintiffs’ attorney a notice that they did not accept the- bail put in by the plaintiffs. Ro justification afterwards took place, and no order to stay proceedings was obtained. Both parties proceeded in the cause, a trial has been had and a new trial granted. The defendant now moves for an order that plaintiffs file new security for costs.
The delay of the defendant in moving for security, conceding that the notice was equivalent to an exception, was such as to render it…
2Cited by2 opinions
- United States Land & Investment Co. v. BusseyNew York Supreme Court · 1889
- Wice v. Commercial InsuranceNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1877