16 How. Pr. 192
Decided July 15, 1858
New York Supreme Court · decided 1858-07-15
<p>Where the plaintiff moved for leave to discontinue without costa, the defendant having put in an answer setting up the defence of infancy, held, that the motion should have been made as soon as the plaintiff was aware of the defence. Having proceeded and made costs after that, he must pay them.</p>
Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently January 1937
2 state decisions
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 1858-07-15
View the full empirical analysis of this case →
¶1The plaintiff should have made this motion as soon as he was aware of the defence of infancy. Since the answer was put in he has continued to proceed with the cause, and has materially increased the costs. There is no excuse for this, and he can only be relieved on payment of them.
¶2Motion for leave to discontinue is granted on payment of the costs after the answer was put in.
¶3No costs allowed on this motion.