Case Name: THE SLATER BANK a. STURDY
Court: New York Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1861-08
Citations: 13 Abb. Pr. 224
Docket Number: 
Parties: THE SLATER BANK a. STURDY.
Judges: 
Reporter: Abbott's Practice Reports
Volume: 13
Pages: 224–225

Head Matter:
THE SLATER BANK a. STURDY.
Supreme Court, First District ;
At Chambers, August, 1861.
Security for Costs by Foreign Corporation.
Where a foreign corporation has commenced an action in this State, after giving ■ security for the costs thereof, as provided in 2 Rev. Stat., 457, § 1, and the sureties become insolvent, the court has no authority to require new or further security to be given.
Motion to compel the plaintiff to file a second bond for costs.
The plaintiff in this action was a foreign corporation, and had filed security for costs at the commencement of the action, as required by 2 Rev. Stat., 457, § 1. The obligors in the bond became insolvent, and the defendant made the present motion.
B. Cozzens, for the motion, cited 2 Rev. Stat., 457, § 1; Ib., 620, § 2, and contended that, by parity of reasoning, from both these provisions the court had and should exercise the power of requiring a new bond in a case like the present.
E. A. & W. B. Carpenter, opposed.
—I. Upon filing security for costs, a foreign corporation obtains the right to sue in the courts of this State in like manner as any corporation created under the laws of this State. (2 Rev. Stat., 4 ed., 698.) The plaintiff filed the necessary security and the right to prosecute accrued.
H. The statute contains no provision compelling foreign corporations, or non-resident plaintiffs, to file a second and new bond in case the obligors in the first become insolvent, or in any other case.
III. The plaintiff, as is admitted by the defendant, complied with the statute, and the court has no power to go beyond it, and independently of it to compel the filing of a new bond. (Hartford Quarry Co. a. Pendleton, 4 Abbotts’ Pr., 463.)

Opinion:
Leonard, J.
—The condition as to security for costs, under which the statute permits a foreign corporation to sue in the courts of this State, was complied with .by the plaintiffs.
There is no provision authorizing the courts to require new security in case the obligors on an undertaking fail, as there is in case of an appeal from a judgment, or in the case of an action where a foreign corporation or a non-resident is plaintiff?
When the security has been once given,' the statute has been complied with. The plaintiff or appellant has then become entitled to the benefit of his appeal, or to prosecute his action.
There is- no further authority to- require further or new security.
The motion is denied, with costs of opposing, to abide the event.