Mazer v. Gerstinblith
This text of 256 A.D. 671 (Mazer v. Gerstinblith) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
An order for substituted service of a summons upon a natural person must direct that service be made at his residence except in an instance where such residence cannot be found. (Civ. Prac. Act, § 231.)
Upon the proof presented, the Special Term was justified in finding that the address at which substituted service upon defendant [672]*672was directed by the court’s order, was, in fact, the defendant’s residence. (Cf. Johnson v. Diamond, 208 App. Div. 639.)
The order should be affirmed, with twenty dollars costs and disbursements to the respondent.
Present — Martin, P. J., O’Malley, Townley, Cohn and Callahan, JJ.
Order unanimously affirmed, with twenty dollars costs and disbursements.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
256 A.D. 671, 11 N.Y.S.2d 392, 1939 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4811, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mazer-v-gerstinblith-nyappdiv-1939.