Dunk v. Dunk
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Appeal by the plaintiff, Alfred O. Dunk, from an order of the Supreme Court, made at the Broome Special Term and entered in the office of the clerk of • the county of Broome on the 6th day of February, 1903, requiring the plaintiff to give an additional undertaking for costs.
Read the full summary
Appeal by the plaintiff, Alfred O. Dunk, from an order of the Supreme Court, made at the Broome Special Term and entered in the office of the clerk of • the county of Broome on the 6th day of February, 1903, requiring the plaintiff to give an additional undertaking for costs. The plaintiff is a non-resident, and soon after the commencement of this action the defendant gave notice to him of a motion to require him to file an undertaking in the sum of $250, or else to deposit that amount in court as security for the costs of the action, pursuant to the provisions of section 3272 of the Code of…
1Dissent
Smith, J. (dissenting):
If the conclusion reached by the learned presiding justice be right, the bond already given as additional security was one which the court was unauthorized to order, and, therefore, is apparently without consideration and void. I apprehend there are many such bonds in the State which would be rendered void within the rule laid down in the prevailing opinion. While these considerations neither add to nor take away from the statute they should lead us to a most careful consideration of the question presented.
By section 3268 of the Code of Civil Procedure the defendant has…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Republic of Honduras v. . SotoNew York Court of Appeals · 1889
- Harbeck v. PupinNew York Supreme Court · 1890