Arnoux v. Steinbrenner
Opinion
The Chancellor :—The English practice in cases of this kind appears to be, to require the complainant to bring his cause to a hearing, to get rid of the costs already accrued. (Anonymous, 1 Ves. jun. 140.)
The "practice of the Supreme Court of this state is much more rational, and I am inclined to follow it in this court. [83]*83The practice there is, to allow the executor or administrator to discontinue without costs, where he has brought a wrong action by mistake, or has ascertained that it would be useless to proceed, in consequence of facts subsequently discovered.
The complainant has brought himself within the principle of the decisions of the Supreme Court, and must be permitted to dismiss his bill without costs.
Motion granted.
Fowler v. Starr, 3 Denio, 164; How, admin’x v. Taylor, 1 Wen. 34.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
1 Paige Ch. 82 (Arnoux v. Steinbrenner) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.