Case Name: JONES a. DECKER
Court: New York Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1861-05
Citations: 14 Abb. Pr. 391
Docket Number: 
Parties: JONES a. DECKER.
Judges: 
Reporter: Abbott's Practice Reports
Volume: 14
Pages: 391–392

Head Matter:
JONES a. DECKER.
Supreme Court, Second District; General Term,
May, 1861.
Appeal to Supreme Court from Inferior Court.—City Court of Brooklyn.—Security for Costs.
An appeal under section 344 of the Code to the Supreme Court from an inferior court, is inffectual unless security for costs be given as on an appeal to the Court of Appeals.
So held, in the case of an appeal from an order of the City Court of Brooklyn overruling a demurrer.
Motion to dismiss an appeal.
This action was brought in the City Court of Brooklyn by James J. J ones against Susan A. and Reuben H. Decker. The defendants separately demurred to the complaint. Judgment was rendered for the plaintiff on the demurrers, with leave for the defendants to answer, on payment of costs. The defendants took the present appeal from this decision as from an order, but gave no security for costs. The plaintiff, after waiting twenty days, entered judgment for $176.86, damages and costs. The defendants noticed their appeal for argument at the general term, whereupon the plaintiff made the present motion to dismiss the appeal.
Provost & Fisher, for the motion.
Brainerd & Rice, opposed.

Opinion:
By the Court. —Emott, J.
This appeal from an order of the City Court of Brooklyn, if it be well taken, is subject to the latter clause of section 6 of the City Court Act, which enacts that all provisions of law relative to appeals from courts of inferior jurisdiction to the Supreme Court, shall apply to appeals from said City Court.
Section 344 of the Code declares in what cases appeals will lie to this court from an inferior court, and section 345 provides that security must be given upon such appeal, that is, upon every appeal to this court from an inferior court, in the same manner and to the same extent as upon an appeal to the Court of Appeals. At the time of the passage of the act of 1850, amending the City Court Act, there was no appeal allowed from an order of an inferior court to the Supreme Court, and the defendants' counsel contends that therefore the provisions contained in the Code as to appeals to the Court of Appeals do not apply to appeals from orders. That conclusion does not follow, however. The 334th section of the Code declares that to render an appeal to the Court of Appeals effectual for any purpose, there must be a written undertaking in the sum of $250 to pay all costs and damages, or that amount must be deposited with the clerk with whom the judgment or order was entered. This section comprehends and provides for appeals from orders as well as from judgments; and it is applicable to every casein which an appeal is given to this court 'from an inferior court, whether it be from an order or from a judgment. It does not alter the case that no appeal is or was given by the Code from orders of inferior courts, for in 1860 an appeal was authorized from orders of County Courts. (laws of 1860, 787, ch. 459.) The appeal is given by the City Court Act. The manner of perfecting it is prescribed by the Code, and that is by giving the same security which is requisite on an appeal to the Court of Appeals, where an undertaking is requisite as well on an appeal from an order as from a judgment. As no security was given on this appeal, the motion to dismiss is granted, with $10 costs.
Present, Lott, Emott, and Brown, JJ.