Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

12 R.I. 244

Spalding v. Bainbridge

Supreme Court of Rhode Island

Decided January 17, 1879

Supreme Court of Rhode Island · decided 1879-01-17

<p>On motion for surety for costs.</p>

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1879-01-17

How this case has been cited

Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently January 2025

10 state decisions

301879188018901900191019201930194019501960197019801990200020102020decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Pee Ctjeiam.

¶1 The defendant moves that the plaintiff be required to give surety for costs. It is conceded that the plaintiff is too poor to procure a surety. The defendant, nevertheless, insists that under Gen. Stat. R. I. cap. 195, § 26, he is entitled to an order in accordance with his motion. We do not think that the statute, though peremptory in its terms, requires us to make the order in a case like the present. Such an order would be of no benefit to the defendant unless we should dismiss the suit for non-compliance with it. This the statute, Gen. Stat. R. I. cap. 195, § 27, does not compel us to do, but plainly leaves in our discretion. We certainly should not dismiss the suit, if it clearly appeared that the noncompliance was because of the plaintiff’s inability on account of poverty. To dismiss the suit in such a case would practically *245 amount to a denial of justice and would be inconsistent with the Constitution. Constitution of R. I. Art. 1, § 5.

Z. 0. Slocum, for plaintiff. B. JV. S. S. LapTiam, for defendant.

¶2 We think, however, that before the defendant is put to the expense of making his defence, the plaintiff should be required to satisfy us, by affidavit or otherwise, that he has probable cause of action. Motion dismissed.

/12/ri/244 · .json · Public domain