Waring v. Baret

2 Cow. 460
New York Supreme Court·Decided February 15, 1824·Published·Cited by 7 cases

Opinion

Curia.

It is enough to subject the attorneys to the costs, that the nominal plaintiff was a non-resident of the state at the commencement of the suit. By the rule referred to, their liability is confined to 100 dollars. We grant the rule that they pay this sum; and that Brady pay the balance.(a)

Rule : On filing affidavits in this cause, by which it appears that the plaintiff is a non-resident of the state of New York, and that he was such non-resident at the time of the commencement of this suit, and that this suit was prosecuted for the benefit of J. Brady, the assignee of the note on which the action was founded; and on motion on the part of the defendant in this cause, and after hearing counsel for D. B. & J. M. attorneys for the plaintiff in this cause, ordered, that D. B. & J. M. Esquires, pay to the defendant his costs accrued in this cause, to an amount not exceeding the sum of 1U0 dollars ; and that the said J. Brady pay to the the defendant the balance of said costs, and the costs of this motion.

Footnotes

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

Waring v. Baret, 2 Cow. 460 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1824).

2 Cow. 460 (Waring v. Baret) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

K&W Children's Trust v. Estate Of William Fay
Court of Appeals of Washington, 2022
Hiscock v. Tuck
122 A.D. 116 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1907)
Metropolitan Addressing & Mailing Co. v. Goodenough
18 N.Y.S. 212 (Superior Court of New York, 1891)
Lyon v. Stanford
42 N.J. Eq. 411 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 1886)
Struppmann v. Muller
55 How. Pr. 427 (The Superior Court of New York City, 1878)
Miles v. Clarke
17 Bosw. 632 (The Superior Court of New York City, 1859)
Scott v. John
15 Ala. 566 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1849)