Di Pietro v. McAllister Bros.
This text of 47 Misc. 2d 714 (Di Pietro v. McAllister Bros.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The order should be unanimously reversed, with $10 costs to defendant, and motion to correct pleadings by substituting McAllister Lighterage Line, Inc., as defendant in place of McAllister Bros., Inc., mine pro tunc, denied. The court was without power to make such order. (Abrams v. General Financial Corp., 274 App. Div. 756.) Plaintiff’s original designation of McAllister Bros., Inc., as defendant may not be regarded as a mere misnomer. The substitution of one defend[715]*715ant for another by order, without provision for service of process on the new defendant, is not sanctioned by CPLR 2001, which continues section 105 of the Civil Practice Act essentially unchanged.
Concur — Di Giovanna, Gulotta and Brenner, JJ.
Order reversed, etc.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
47 Misc. 2d 714, 263 N.Y.S.2d 32, 1965 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1682, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/di-pietro-v-mcallister-bros-nyappterm-1965.