Flynn v. Tinney

New York Supreme Court

Flynn v. Tinney

60 N.Y.S. 791

DecidedAugust 10, 1899

StatusPublished

This text of 60 N.Y.S. 791 (Flynn v. Tinney) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Flynn v. Tinney, 60 N.Y.S. 791 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1899).

Pincite

Opinion

McADAM, J.

Section 3271 of the Code applies to this case. Whenever an executor or administrator is plaintiff, whether resident or nonresident, the application is addressed to the discretion of the court (McDougal v. Gray [Sup.] 4 N. Y. Supp. 74; Hall v. Waterbury, 5 Abb. N. C. 356), and when it appears, as it does here, that the action is brought in good faith, the application for security for costs should be denied (Ryan v. Potter, 4 Civ. Proc. R. 80).

The motion is accordingly denied, with $10 costs to abide event.

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

McADAM, J.

Section 3271 of the Code applies to this case. Whenever an executor or administrator is plaintiff, whether resident or nonresident, the application is addressed to the discretion of the court (McDougal v. Gray [Sup.] 4 N. Y. Supp. 74; Hall v. Waterbury, 5 Abb. N. C. 356), and when it appears, as it does here, that the action is brought in good faith, the application for security for costs should be denied (Ryan v. Potter, 4 Civ. Proc. R. 80).

The motion is accordingly denied, with $10 costs to abide event.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

60 N.Y.S. 791, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/flynn-v-tinney-nysupct-1899.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack