Case ID: nys_17/html/0943-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      Per Curiam.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Husted, Respondent, v. Cruikshank, Appellant.
    
      (Supreme Court, General Term, First Department.
    
    February 18, 1892.)
    Appeal from special term, New York county.
    Action by Gilbert M. Husted against Augustus Cruikshank, trustee, etc. From an order vacating an order for security for costs, and from an order denying a motion to vacate an order for the examination of defendant, defendant appeals.
    For former report, see 14 N. Y. Supp. 526.
    Argued before Van Brunt, P. J., and Lawrence, J.
    
      Edward Van Ness, for appellant. A. Edward Woodruff, for respondent.
   Per Curiam.

We are of the opinion that the plaintiff should be required to file security for costs, and that the order appealed from, relating to such security, should be reversed. We are also of the opinion that the order for the examination of the defendant should be reversed, with costs and disbursements to the appellant.