Hinds v. Douglass
New York Supreme Court
Appeal from order at special term. Peter S. Woodbury and Earl Douglass, two of the defendants in this action, John Kelly, sheriff, being the third, moved for and obtained an order dated February 12th, 1862, that William A. Hinds, the plaintiff, file security for costs, on the ground that he was a non-resident, which order was on appeal affirmed.
Read the full summary
Appeal from order at special term. Peter S. Woodbury and Earl Douglass, two of the defendants in this action, John Kelly, sheriff, being the third, moved for and obtained an order dated February 12th, 1862, that William A. Hinds, the plaintiff, file security for costs, on the ground that he was a non-resident, which order was on appeal affirmed. The terms of the order were as follows: “ That the plaintiff file security for costs within twenty days after service of the copy of this order, or if an appeal be taken then within twenty days after- the service of an order deciding said appeal, and…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court.*—Sutherland, J.
The practice before and since the Code in obtaining security for costs is correctly stated by Justice Barnard, in Caldwell a. Manning, 15 Abbott, 271. He also states correctly the practice before the Code, in case the security was not filed within- a reasonable time after a peremptory order to" file security.
There can be no doubt, I think, as to the power of the court to order judgment of nonpros., in case the security is not filed within a reasonable time after a peremptory order. For the court to do so, is perfectly consistent with the statutory stay of the…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Champlin v. PetrieNew York Supreme Court · 1830
- Glover v. CumingNew York Supreme Court · 1835