Walker v. Holmes & Launitz

22 Wend. 614
New York Supreme Court·Decided June 15, 1840·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

By the Court,

Bronson, J.

The practice on requiring

security for costs has been regulated by statute, and it is enough that the plaintiff has complied with the statute by executing a bond with a sufficient surety, and the surety has justified. See Barnett v. Pardow, 10 Wendell, 615.

Motion denied.

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

Walker v. Holmes & Launitz, 22 Wend. 614 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1840).

22 Wend. 614 (Walker v. Holmes & Launitz) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Willmont v. Meserole
16 Abb. Pr. 308 (The Superior Court of New York City, 1875)
Miles v. Clarke
17 Bosw. 632 (The Superior Court of New York City, 1859)