Board of Commissioners of Charities v. Litzen

New York Marine Court

Board of Commissioners of Charities v. Litzen

1 N.Y. City Ct. Rep. 374

DecidedSeptember 23, 1881

StatusPublished

This text of 1 N.Y. City Ct. Rep. 374 (Board of Commissioners of Charities v. Litzen) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Marine Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Board of Commissioners of Charities v. Litzen, 1 N.Y. City Ct. Rep. 374 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1881).

Pincite

Opinion

McAdam, J.

The summons served herein was issued against “ George Williard,” and was changed by dhe process server-in pencil. The name “George Williard” was stricken out by aline run through it and the name “K. Litzen” was substituted for it, and the process, as altered, was then and there served upon the defendant. The defendant moves to set aside the summons for this irregularity. The practice complained of is one not to be commended. A process server has no roving commission to strike out the names of defendants from process and insert instead the name of any person he sees fit to select. The process of the court, if allowed to be used in this irresponsible way, would be liable to gross abuse. Such [375]*375liberties should be confined to the attorney or his managing clerk.

Motion to set aside granted.

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

McAdam, J.

The summons served herein was issued against “ George Williard,” and was changed by dhe process server-in pencil. The name “George Williard” was stricken out by aline run through it and the name “K. Litzen” was substituted for it, and the process, as altered, was then and there served upon the defendant. The defendant moves to set aside the summons for this irregularity. The practice complained of is one not to be commended. A process server has no roving commission to strike out the names of defendants from process and insert instead the name of any person he sees fit to select. The process of the court, if allowed to be used in this irresponsible way, would be liable to gross abuse. Such [375]*375liberties should be confined to the attorney or his managing clerk.

Motion to set aside granted.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 N.Y. City Ct. Rep. 374, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/board-of-commissioners-of-charities-v-litzen-nymarct-1881.