Jacobs v. Atlas Construction Co.

119 N.Y.S. 168
Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York·Decided November 12, 1909·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

There seems to be no doubt that the summons was served on a person in no way connected with defendant corporation, and that defendant has not appeared, except for the purpose of this appeal, so that the court below never acquired jurisdiction over defendant. The practice of the latter in appealing from the judgment entered without service was proper, as no service of process was made on defendant (Swift & Co. v. Mutual Commission Co. [Sup.] 107 N. Y. Supp. 40; Iron Clad Mfg. Co. v. B. E. Smith & Sons, 28 Misc. Rep. 172, 59 N. Y. Supp. 332; Burkhard v. Smith, 19 Misc. Rep. 31, 42 N. Y. Supp. 638); and the appeal was timely taken, inasmuch as no written notice of the entry of the judgment was served on defendant (Code, § 3046). "

The judgment must be reversed, with costs, and the complaint dismissed.

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

Jacobs v. Atlas Construction Co., 119 N.Y.S. 168 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1909).

119 N.Y.S. 168 (Jacobs v. Atlas Construction Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Weaver v. Weaver
96 Misc. 476 (New York Supreme Court, 1916)