The appeal taken herein is entirely without merit. The order of the general term, entered upon the appeal from the sufficiency of the surety upon the undertaking for costs offered by the plaintiff, clearly allowed the deposit of the money, instead of giving a new undertaking. The order appealed from should be affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. All concur.
8 N.Y.S. 82
Winchester v. Browne.
(Supreme Court, General Term, First Department.
November 7, 1889.)
Costs on Appeal—Substituted Surety—Deposit in Court.
An order that other security be substituted in place of an undertaking that had been disapproved is complied with by paying money into court.
Appeal from special term, New York county.
Action by George O. Winchester against T. Quincy Browne. Plaintiff gave a bond for defendant’s costs, but the undertaking was disapproved. Thereafter an order was granted containing this clause: “It is further ordered that plaintiff may, within ten days from the date of this order, substitute other security in place and stead of the undertaking so disapproved .as aforesaid.” Defendant appeals from an order denying his motion to dismiss the complaint, on the ground that plaintiff had not given security for costs, in accordance with said order, by paying money into court. For former reports, see 4 M. Y. Supp. 155, 6 N. Y. Supp. 913, 7 M. Y. Supp. 550.
Argued before Van Brunt, P. J., and Brady and Daniels, JJ.
Abbett & Fuller, (Henry Schmitt, of counsel,) for appellant. A. W. Otis, for respondent.
Winchester v. Browne
8 N.Y.S. 82
Case Details
8 N.Y.S. 82
References
Nothing yet... Still searching!
Nothing yet... Still searching!