Rappaport v. Werner

34 A.D. 525
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJuly 1, 1898
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 34 A.D. 525 (Rappaport v. Werner) 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
Rappaport v. Werner, 34 A.D. 525 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1898).

Opinion

Patterson, J.:

The order appealed from, by which this cause was stricken from the general calendar, was erroneously madel The action was against tort -feasors, each of whom was charged with responsibility- for the same alleged wrong. One of the defendants was a copartner of the plaintiff. The case was stricken from the calendar on the ground that' he was a necessary party, and that as lie was not served with the summons the cause was not in a condition to be put upon the calendar. That defendant was made a party on the record, but he was not served with process. Under the allegations of the complaint, each defendant was severally, as well as jointly, liable, if there is any liability at all. Whether the action can be maintained ultimately, is not the question that was before the court on this motion. It was a common-law action, and in such an action the fact that one defendant severally liable is not served, does not stay the action as ■against others who are severally liable. If the summons is issued against all and only served on one or more severally liable, the plaintiff may proceed against those served as if they were the only defend[526]*526ants named. That is specially provided by section 456 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Those served must answer, for their wrong. The ■case was properly on the calendar for trial, and the order must be reversed, with costs,, and the case restored to its proper place on the calendar.

Van Brunt, P. J\, Barrett, Rumsey and O’Brien, JJ., .concurred.

Order reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and case restored to its place on the calendar.

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

Related

Hamilton Fire Insurance v. Greger
218 A.D. 536 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1926)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
34 A.D. 525, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rappaport-v-werner-nyappdiv-1898.