Blume v. A. Marcus Co.

New York Supreme Court

Blume v. A. Marcus Co.

129 Misc. 217, 220 N.Y.S. 683, 1927 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 873

DecidedMarch 25, 1927

StatusPublished

This text of 129 Misc. 217 (Blume v. A. Marcus Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Blume v. A. Marcus Co., 129 Misc. 217, 220 N.Y.S. 683, 1927 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 873 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1927).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The defendant corporation, which was organized under the laws of Maryland and had its place of business in Baltimore, was not authorized to do business in New York and had no place of business in this State and no property here. It made the bulk of its purchases through correspondence or by being visited by traveling salesmen employed by other concerns. Occasionally some of its officers made purchases in New York. Its name did not appear in any New York telephone book or directory. One of its officers while in New York for part of a day was served with a summons, and it was error to deny the motion to vacate such service.

Order reversed, with ten dollars costs, and motion to set aside service of summons granted, with ten dollars costs.

All concur; present, Lydon, Levy and Crain, JJ.

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

Per Curiam.

The defendant corporation, which was organized under the laws of Maryland and had its place of business in Baltimore, was not authorized to do business in New York and had no place of business in this State and no property here. It made the bulk of its purchases through correspondence or by being visited by traveling salesmen employed by other concerns. Occasionally some of its officers made purchases in New York. Its name did not appear in any New York telephone book or directory. One of its officers while in New York for part of a day was served with a summons, and it was error to deny the motion to vacate such service.

Order reversed, with ten dollars costs, and motion to set aside service of summons granted, with ten dollars costs.

All concur; present, Lydon, Levy and Crain, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

129 Misc. 217, 220 N.Y.S. 683, 1927 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 873, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/blume-v-a-marcus-co-nysupct-1927.