Gookin v. Upham
22 N.H. 38
This text of 22 N.H. 38 (Gookin v. Upham) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Superior Court of New Hampshire primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Bluebook
Gookin v. Upham, 22 N.H. 38 (N.H. Super. Ct. 1850).
Opinion
The Revised Statutes, ch. 191, <§> 7, give the Court power in all actions and petitions, “ to order such security for costs as they may deem just and reasonable.”
In this case the plaintiff is shown to be insolvent, and the suit is prosecuted in his name for the benefit of his assignees. We think it just and reasonable that the defendant should have security for his costs.
Motion allowed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Gerace v. Bentley
62 V.I. 254 (Superior Court of The Virgin Islands, 2015)
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
22 N.H. 38, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gookin-v-upham-nhsuperct-1850.