Sheridan v. Major

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Sheridan v. Major

15 A.D.2d 870, 225 N.Y.S.2d 267, 1962 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11309

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

DecidedFebruary 22, 1962

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 15 A.D.2d 870 (Sheridan v. Major) 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

Sheridan v. Major, 15 A.D.2d 870, 225 N.Y.S.2d 267, 1962 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11309 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1962).

Pincite

Opinion

Memorandum:

We cannot decide upon the face of the complaint that no cause of action against Sheriff Major was stated. It would appear that the warrant under color of which the plaintiff was arrested was issued in a civil proceeding. It has been held generally that filiation proceedings conducted outside of New York City are civil in nature (Matter of Clausi, 296 N. Y. 354; Matter of Bancroft, 276 App. Div. 485; Scruton v. Dziewisz, 284 App. Div. 276, 280). That being so, Sheriff Major would be an appropriate party defendant (cf. Isereau v. Stone, 3 A D 2d 243). (Appeal from order of Onondaga Special Term dismissing the complaint as to defendant Sarto D. Major, Sheriff.) Present — Williams, P. J., Bastow, Halpern, McClusky and Henry, JJ. [28 Misc 2d 822.]

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

Memorandum:

We cannot decide upon the face of the complaint that no cause of action against Sheriff Major was stated. It would appear that the warrant under color of which the plaintiff was arrested was issued in a civil proceeding. It has been held generally that filiation proceedings conducted outside of New York City are civil in nature (Matter of Clausi, 296 N. Y. 354; Matter of Bancroft, 276 App. Div. 485; Scruton v. Dziewisz, 284 App. Div. 276, 280). That being so, Sheriff Major would be an appropriate party defendant (cf. Isereau v. Stone, 3 A D 2d 243). (Appeal from order of Onondaga Special Term dismissing the complaint as to defendant Sarto D. Major, Sheriff.) Present — Williams, P. J., Bastow, Halpern, McClusky and Henry, JJ. [28 Misc 2d 822.]

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

15 A.D.2d 870, 225 N.Y.S.2d 267, 1962 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11309, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sheridan-v-major-nyappdiv-1962.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack