Agchem Service Corp. v. J. K. Hurd & Son

New York County Courts

Agchem Service Corp. v. J. K. Hurd & Son

75 Misc. 2d 926, 349 N.Y.S.2d 936, 1973 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1337

CourtNew York County Courts

DecidedNovember 20, 1973

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 75 Misc. 2d 926 (Agchem Service Corp. v. J. K. Hurd & Son) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York County Courts primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Agchem Service Corp. v. J. K. Hurd & Son, 75 Misc. 2d 926, 349 N.Y.S.2d 936, 1973 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1337 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1973).

Pincite

Opinion

Reginald S. Oliver, J.

The complaint in the above action states in part: “ wherefore Plaintiff demands judgment against the defendant in the amount of $10,681.66 with interest from the 30th day of April, 1973 together with the costs and disbursements of this action,”

While it appears that the summons was served on the 10th day of May, 1973, and the complaint was served at a subsequent date, no motion was made at the trial to amend the ad damnum clause downward to meet the jurisdictional limits of County Court. Therefore, the court lacks jurisdiction to determine the matter. (Van Clief v. Van Vechten, 130 N. Y. 571; Heffron [927]*927v. Jennings, 66 App. Div. 443; Mansson v. Nostrand, 183 App. Div. 371; N. Y. Const., art. VI, § 11, subd. a.)

It is well settled that a defendant may waive venue requirements, and submit to the jurisdiction of1 a County Court even though he is not a resident of the county. However, jurisdiction cannot be conferred on County Court where by constitutional limitation it is without jurisdiction in any event. (Auto Dealers Discount Corp. v. Santoro, 170 Misc. 635; Wolfe v. Blackman, 279 App. Div. 977; Didio v. S. A. Healey Co., 40 N. Y. S. 2d 278; Wachtel v. Diamond State Eng. Corp., 215 App. Div. 15.)

The complaint is dismissed without prejudice to the plaintiff to bring Ms action before the proper court.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Reginald S. Oliver, J.

The complaint in the above action states in part: “ wherefore Plaintiff demands judgment against the defendant in the amount of $10,681.66 with interest from the 30th day of April, 1973 together with the costs and disbursements of this action,”

While it appears that the summons was served on the 10th day of May, 1973, and the complaint was served at a subsequent date, no motion was made at the trial to amend the ad damnum clause downward to meet the jurisdictional limits of County Court. Therefore, the court lacks jurisdiction to determine the matter. (Van Clief v. Van Vechten, 130 N. Y. 571; Heffron [927]*927v. Jennings, 66 App. Div. 443; Mansson v. Nostrand, 183 App. Div. 371; N. Y. Const., art. VI, § 11, subd. a.)

It is well settled that a defendant may waive venue requirements, and submit to the jurisdiction of1 a County Court even though he is not a resident of the county. However, jurisdiction cannot be conferred on County Court where by constitutional limitation it is without jurisdiction in any event. (Auto Dealers Discount Corp. v. Santoro, 170 Misc. 635; Wolfe v. Blackman, 279 App. Div. 977; Didio v. S. A. Healey Co., 40 N. Y. S. 2d 278; Wachtel v. Diamond State Eng. Corp., 215 App. Div. 15.)

The complaint is dismissed without prejudice to the plaintiff to bring Ms action before the proper court.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

75 Misc. 2d 926, 349 N.Y.S.2d 936, 1973 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1337, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/agchem-service-corp-v-j-k-hurd-son-nycountyct-1973.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack