Weeks v. Merritt

5 Rob. 610
The Superior Court of New York City·Decided February 15, 1866·Published

Opinion

1. Want of service of the summons, in an action, is not a mere irregularity, but affects the jurisdiction, and is not affected by the statutory limitation of two ' years, against motions to set aside for irregularity.

2. The court is bound to consider the service as made at the time stated in the proof of it, after a motion to set a judgment aside, founded on it for want of service, has been denied; and if such service appears therein to have been more than ten years ago, and no excuse is offered for the laches in not applying before, a motion to open the judgment and let the .defendant in to defend will be denied.

(Before Robertson, Ch. J.

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

Weeks v. Merritt, 5 Rob. 610 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1866).

5 Rob. 610 (Weeks v. Merritt) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.