M. P. Smith & Sons Co. v. B. Koronsky & Son

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

M. P. Smith & Sons Co. v. B. Koronsky & Son

123 N.Y.S. 950

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedJune 24, 1910

StatusPublished

This text of 123 N.Y.S. 950 (M. P. Smith & Sons Co. v. B. Koronsky & Son) 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.

Bluebook

M. P. Smith & Sons Co. v. B. Koronsky & Son, 123 N.Y.S. 950 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1910).

Pincite

Opinion

SEABURY, J.

This appeal is taken under section 311 of the Municipal Court act (Laws 1902, c. 580), upon the ground that the defendant was not served with a summons. The plaintiff claims that service was made upon one Louis Silverman, managing agent of the defendant corporation. The weakness of the plaintiff’s position is that there is no competent proof presented to show that Silverman was the managing agent of the defendant.

The judgment is reversed, and the complaint is dismissed, with costs. All concur.

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

SEABURY, J.

This appeal is taken under section 311 of the Municipal Court act (Laws 1902, c. 580), upon the ground that the defendant was not served with a summons. The plaintiff claims that service was made upon one Louis Silverman, managing agent of the defendant corporation. The weakness of the plaintiff’s position is that there is no competent proof presented to show that Silverman was the managing agent of the defendant.

The judgment is reversed, and the complaint is dismissed, with costs. All concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

123 N.Y.S. 950, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/m-p-smith-sons-co-v-b-koronsky-son-nyappterm-1910.