Pacek v. Ferrar

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Pacek v. Ferrar

258 A.D. 772, 14 N.Y.S.2d 814

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedOctober 4, 1939

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 258 A.D. 772 (Pacek v. Ferrar) 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.

Bluebook

Pacek v. Ferrar, 258 A.D. 772, 14 N.Y.S.2d 814 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1939).

Pincite

Opinion

— Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. Memorandum: No personal service of the summons and complaint in the foreclosure action was made on the respondent Ferrar. The entry of a deficiency judgment against him, therefore, was absolutely void for lack of jurisdiction of his person. The Supreme Court has inherent power to vacate a judgment so entered. (Civ. Prac. Act, § 1083; Matter of Rudgers, 250 App. Div. 359; Matter of Battalico v. Knickebocker Fireproofing Co., Id. 258; motion for leave to appeal denied, 274 N. Y. 641; Kamp v. Kamp, 59 id. 212.) Nor has Ferrar appeared generally in this action so as to give the court jurisdiction. (Noble v. Crandall, 49 Hun, 474.) All concur. (The order amends a judgment in a foreclosure action.) Present — Crosby, Lewis, Cunningham, Taylor and Dowling, JJ.

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

— Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. Memorandum: No personal service of the summons and complaint in the foreclosure action was made on the respondent Ferrar. The entry of a deficiency judgment against him, therefore, was absolutely void for lack of jurisdiction of his person. The Supreme Court has inherent power to vacate a judgment so entered. (Civ. Prac. Act, § 1083; Matter of Rudgers, 250 App. Div. 359; Matter of Battalico v. Knickebocker Fireproofing Co., Id. 258; motion for leave to appeal denied, 274 N. Y. 641; Kamp v. Kamp, 59 id. 212.) Nor has Ferrar appeared generally in this action so as to give the court jurisdiction. (Noble v. Crandall, 49 Hun, 474.) All concur. (The order amends a judgment in a foreclosure action.) Present — Crosby, Lewis, Cunningham, Taylor and Dowling, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

258 A.D. 772, 14 N.Y.S.2d 814, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pacek-v-ferrar-nyappdiv-1939.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack