Baker v. Wales
The Superior Court of New York City
Appeal from order vacating and setting aside service of summons. The following is the opinion delivered at Special Term: Sedgwick, J.—The facts seem to Tbe that the plaintiffs kept in their office parcels of summons with places left "blank for defendants’ names, and amounts to be claimed. The inference is, that if a business interview were not satisfactory, service of summons would follow, after the blanks had been filled up.
Read the full summary
Appeal from order vacating and setting aside service of summons. The following is the opinion delivered at Special Term: Sedgwick, J.—The facts seem to Tbe that the plaintiffs kept in their office parcels of summons with places left "blank for defendants’ names, and amounts to be claimed. The inference is, that if a business interview were not satisfactory, service of summons would follow, after the blanks had been filled up. On January 19th, one of the plaintiffs wrote to defendant, who lived in Connecticut, to come to New York to settle the claim in dispute, and to answer by return mail…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court.—Freedman, J.
The court below found, upon evidence somewhat conflicting, that deceit had been used for the purpose of bringing defendant within the jurisdiction of this court. We have carefully-examined the evidence and deem it amply sufficient to sustain such finding. The service of the summons was therefore properly vacated and set aside (Carpenter v. Spooner, 2 Sands, 716).
The order must be affirmed, with costs.
Monell and Curtis, JJ., concurred.
2Cited by3 opinions
- Lingo v. Reichenbach Land Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1938
- Martin v. WoodhallThe Superior Court of the City of New York and Buffalo · 1889
- Atlantic & Pacific Telegraph Co. v. Baltimore & Ohio RailroadThe Superior Court of New York City · 1880