Blaise v. Bovin

City of New York Municipal Court

Blaise v. Bovin

173 Misc. 963, 18 N.Y.S.2d 716, 1939 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2756

CourtCity of New York Municipal Court

DecidedDecember 14, 1939

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 173 Misc. 963 (Blaise v. Bovin) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering City of New York Municipal Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Blaise v. Bovin, 173 Misc. 963, 18 N.Y.S.2d 716, 1939 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2756 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1939).

Pincite

Opinion

Coleman, J.

There are three plaintiffs, passengers in and owner of an automobile, who join in one complaint in an action against the defendant for negligence and for damage to the automobile. One of the plaintiffs is a non-resident, and the defendant moves for security for costs as against her. The appropriate statute (Civ. Prac. Act, § 1522, subd. 8) is as follows: “ In a case specified in this section, if there are two or more plaintiffs, the defendant cannot require security for costs to be given unless he is entitled to require it of all the plaintiffs.” Defendant urges that this section is inapplicable as there is more than one “ case.” His contention overlooks the distinction between a “ case ” and several “ causes of action ” incorporated in a “ case.” There is only one case here. (See Salimoff. & Co. v. Standard Oil Co., 259 N. Y. 219. Cf. Brown v. Cohan, 254 App. Div. 20.) The motion is denied. Order filed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Coleman, J.

There are three plaintiffs, passengers in and owner of an automobile, who join in one complaint in an action against the defendant for negligence and for damage to the automobile. One of the plaintiffs is a non-resident, and the defendant moves for security for costs as against her. The appropriate statute (Civ. Prac. Act, § 1522, subd. 8) is as follows: “ In a case specified in this section, if there are two or more plaintiffs, the defendant cannot require security for costs to be given unless he is entitled to require it of all the plaintiffs.” Defendant urges that this section is inapplicable as there is more than one “ case.” His contention overlooks the distinction between a “ case ” and several “ causes of action ” incorporated in a “ case.” There is only one case here. (See Salimoff. & Co. v. Standard Oil Co., 259 N. Y. 219. Cf. Brown v. Cohan, 254 App. Div. 20.) The motion is denied. Order filed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

173 Misc. 963, 18 N.Y.S.2d 716, 1939 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2756, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/blaise-v-bovin-nynyccityct-1939.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack