Amdur v. Meyer
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Dissent
Eager, J. (dissenting).
We dissent, and would reverse the order appealed from and deny the motion requiring the plaintiffs to furnish security pursuant to the provisions of section 61-b of the General Corporation Law. The right to require security for the costs of an action is regarded as wholly statutory. “ [A]uthority therefor must be found in the statute, or it does not exist.” (Republic of Honduras v. Soto, 112 N. Y. 310, 313. *575Also Turmelle v. Jefferson, 166 Misc. 70.) “ [T]here is no discretionary power in the court to act beyond the provisions of the statute but rather it is the duty of…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Republic of Honduras v. . SotoNew York Court of Appeals · 1889
- Bailey v. BaileyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1943
- Matter of Bailey v. BaileyNew York Court of Appeals · 1943
- Turmelle v. JeffersonAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1938
- Bowles v. Glenzer, New York County Courts1946