Case ID: dc_1/html/0281-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "The CouRT", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Duane v. Rind.
    If the plaintiff has not a domicil in this district, he may he ruled to give security for costs.
    Motion, by the defendant, for a rule on the plaintiff, to give security for costs, on the ground that the plaintiff is a non-resident. The facts admitted were that the plaintiff has a large bookstore in this city, and occasionally resides here during the winter, has a family, and now resides at Philadelphia. His family never has resided here. He has a storekeeper here. The marshal has applied at the store and received' pay for fees regularly. See the Act of Maryland, 1796, c. 43, § 12. \
   The CouRT

(Kilty, C. J., absent,)

was of opinion that the rule ought to be laid. The Act of Assembly, 1796, c. 43, '■§> 12, must be understood to refer to the domicil, the place where the party resides, with his wife and children, if he has any.