Legal Opinion
Zimmerman v. Mendenhall
Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County
Decided April 21, 1840PublishedCited by 1 opinion
THIS suit was brought to March term, 1840, No. 590. The defendant filed an affidavit of defence; and, on filing proof that two of the three plaintiffs were, at the institution of the suit, residents of Buenos Ayres, the court granted a rule on the plaintiffs to show cause why they should not give security for costs. It appeared that the third defendant resided in this state.
1Opinion of the Court
The Court
said that the rule of court did not apply to this case, and security for costs would not be ordered in cases where any one of the plaintiffs resided in this state, on the ground that the others resided out of it. (See 1 Miles 450, 321.)
Rule discharged.
2Cited by1 opinion
- Kellog ex rel. Monroe v. BokeePennsylvania Court of Common Pleas · 1898