Pohlers v. Exeter Manufacturing Co.

267 A.D. 806, 46 N.Y.S.2d 96, 1944 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4825

Opinion

Determination affirmed, with twenty dollars costs and disbursements, with leave to the defendant to answer or otherwise move with respect to the complaint within five days after service of order with notice of entry thereof, on payment of said costs. No opinion. Present — Martin, P. J., Glennon, Untermyer, Dore and Callahan, JJ.; Untermyer, J., concurs on the ground that defendant by reason of its contention, previously maintained successfully in this action, is estopped to contest the validity of service on the Secretary of State (Horn v. Bennett, 253 App. Div. 630; Houghton v. Thomas, 220 App. Div. 41$; see, also, Starbuck v. Starbuck, 173 N. Y. 503); Martin, P. J., dissents. [See post, p. 869.]

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

Pohlers v. Exeter Manufacturing Co., 267 A.D. 806, 46 N.Y.S.2d 96, 1944 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4825 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1944).

267 A.D. 806 (Pohlers v. Exeter Manufacturing Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Starbuck v. . Starbuck
66 N.E. 193 (New York Court of Appeals, 1903)
Williams v. Renshaw
220 A.D. 39 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1927)
Horn v. Bennett
253 A.D. 630 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1938)