From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Drew v. Northwestern Corp.

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department
Mar 7, 1929
133 Misc. 706 (N.Y. App. Term 1929)

Opinion

March 7, 1929.

Appeal from the Municipal Court, Borough of Manhattan, First District.

Samuel Bikoff, for the appellant.

Joseph W. Landes, for the respondent.


Service of the summons in this case on the foreign corporate defendant was made by delivery thereof to the person in whose possession property of the defendant was found available for attachment. Section 48 of the Municipal Court Code, in so far as it authorizes such service upon a non-resident defendant, is unconstitutional. ( Nerenberg v. Keith, 101 Misc. 551.) The fact that tangible property was levied on by the marshal would not change the situation. The test of the constitutionality of the statute is what might be done under its terms, not what was done in a particular case.

Order reversed, with ten dollars costs, and motion granted, with ten dollars costs.

All concur; present, LYDON, CALLAHAN and PETERS, JJ.


Summaries of

Drew v. Northwestern Corp.

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department
Mar 7, 1929
133 Misc. 706 (N.Y. App. Term 1929)
Case details for

Drew v. Northwestern Corp.

Case Details

Full title:JAMES F. DREW, Respondent, v. NORTHWESTERN CORPORATION and Another…

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department

Date published: Mar 7, 1929

Citations

133 Misc. 706 (N.Y. App. Term 1929)
233 N.Y.S. 292

Citing Cases

Mayefsky v. Davis

But, since section 48 of the Municipal Court Code makes specific provision for the manner of service of the…

Arbetter, Inc., v. Isabel

Aside from these considerations, however, I am of the opinion that section 48 of the Municipal Court Code, as…