Case ID: ad_64/html/0483-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Jenks, J.:", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Cocco Venanzio, by his Guardian ad Litem, Salvatore Venanzio, Appellant, v. Levi C. Weir, as President of Adams Express Company, Respondent.
    
      Security for costs from, an infant plaintiff—the requirement is not in violation of the Constitution.
    
    Section 3268 oí the Code of Civil Procedure, authorizing the' defendant, in an action brought in a court of record to require security for costs, where the plaintiff is an infant (not suing as a poor person) whose guardian dd'litem has not given such security, does not violate the fourteenth amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America.
    Appeal by the plaintiff, Coceo Yenanzio, by his guardian ad. litem, Salvatore Yenanzio, from an order of the Supreme Court, made at the Kings County -Special Term and entered in the office of the clerk of the county of Kings on the 18th day of February, 1901, denying the plaintiff’s motion to set aside an order theretofore entered in the above-entitled action, requiring him to furnish security for costs.
    
      Achille J. Oishei [Nelson L. Keach with him on the brief], for the appellant.
    
      Arnold W. Sherman [Eugene Lamb Richards, Jr., with him on the brief], for the respondent.
   Jenks, J.:

The sole ground of the motion was that section 3268 of the Code of Civil Procedure violates the fourteenth amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America. This amendment merely requires that all persons subjected to legislation shall receive' like treatment -under■like, -circumstances'- and. conditions.■.' OMss legislation discriminating! against some and favoring others is prohibited ; but legislation which, carrying out a public purpose; is limited in its application,' if within the sphere of its -operation it affects alike all persons similarly situated, is not within the amendment. (Barbier v. Connolly, 113 U. S. 27, 32; Missouri v. Lewis, 101 id. 22; Hayes v. Missouri, 120 id. 68; Conley v. Woonsocket Institution for Savings, 11 R. I. 147.)

The order should be affirmed, without costs.

Goodrich, P. J., Woodward, Hirschberg and Sewell, JJ., concurred.

Order affirmed, without costs.