Forstmann v. Schulting
1 Silv. Ct. App. 521, 11 N.Y. St. Rep. 763
This text of 1 Silv. Ct. App. 521 (Forstmann v. Schulting) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Bluebook
Forstmann v. Schulting, 1 Silv. Ct. App. 521, 11 N.Y. St. Rep. 763 (N.Y. 1887).
Opinion
The notice of the order and its entry did
not show by indorsement or otherwise the office address or place of business of the attorney serving it, and was therefore ineffectual to limit the time of appeal. Kelly v. Sheehan, 76 N. Y. 325; Bockes v. Hathorn, 78 id. 222.
The motion to dismiss the appeal should therefore be denied, but without costs.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Kelly v. . Sheehan
76 N.Y. 325 (New York Court of Appeals, 1879)
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
1 Silv. Ct. App. 521, 11 N.Y. St. Rep. 763, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/forstmann-v-schulting-ny-1887.