Smith v. Smith

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Smith v. Smith

20 A.D.2d 700, 246 N.Y.S.2d 863, 1964 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4367

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

DecidedFebruary 20, 1964

StatusPublished

This text of 20 A.D.2d 700 (Smith v. Smith) 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

Smith v. Smith, 20 A.D.2d 700, 246 N.Y.S.2d 863, 1964 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4367 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1964).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, entered on October 8,1963, unanimously affirmed, subject to the following conditions, without costs to either party: (1) the parties shall stipulate the defendant-appellant (appellant) is immune from process while in the State of New York in connection with the hearing in the instant ease (Thermoid Co. v. Fabel, 4 N Y 2d 494; Petrova v. Roberts, 245 N. Y. 518; New England Ind. v. Margiotti, 270 App. Div. 488, affd. 296 N. Y. 722); and (2) such appearance does not and shall not constitute a general appearance and submission by appellant of personal jurisdiction to the courts of New York State. In the event the parties do not so stipulate within 10 days, then appellant may renew this motion, provided he establishes that he no longer comes to New York and that his out-of-State deposition would be usable under subdivision 3 of rule 3117 of the Civil Practice Law and Rules. Settle order on notice. Concur — Breitel, J. P., Valente, McNally, Stevens and Eager, JJ.

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

Order, entered on October 8,1963, unanimously affirmed, subject to the following conditions, without costs to either party: (1) the parties shall stipulate the defendant-appellant (appellant) is immune from process while in the State of New York in connection with the hearing in the instant ease (Thermoid Co. v. Fabel, 4 N Y 2d 494; Petrova v. Roberts, 245 N. Y. 518; New England Ind. v. Margiotti, 270 App. Div. 488, affd. 296 N. Y. 722); and (2) such appearance does not and shall not constitute a general appearance and submission by appellant of personal jurisdiction to the courts of New York State. In the event the parties do not so stipulate within 10 days, then appellant may renew this motion, provided he establishes that he no longer comes to New York and that his out-of-State deposition would be usable under subdivision 3 of rule 3117 of the Civil Practice Law and Rules. Settle order on notice. Concur — Breitel, J. P., Valente, McNally, Stevens and Eager, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

20 A.D.2d 700, 246 N.Y.S.2d 863, 1964 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4367, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/smith-v-smith-nyappdiv-1964.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack