Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

1 Miles 321

Searle v. Mann

Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County · decided 1836-09-10

BILISfJEJIRS, for the defendant, on filing the defendant’s affidavit of a just defence, and that the plaintiff resided out of the state, moved for a rule on the plaintiff to give security for costs, under the 26th rule of the court, which prescribes, that “in all cases where the plaintiff resides out of the state, in qui tarn actions, in suits on administration and office bonds, or when the plaintiff, after suit brought, has taken the benefit of the insolvent laws, the…

Decided 1836-09-10

Per Curiam.

¶1The affidavit as to the non residence of the plaintiff, is defective in not stating that the plaintiff was not a resident of the state at the time of the institution of the suit. The rule of court was not intended to designate any cause for an order for security for costs arising after suit brought, except that specially provided for, that is, “ where the plaintiff has taken the benefit of the insolvent laws.”

¶2Motion refused.

/1/miles/321 · .json · Public domain