Catlin v. . Ricketts
New York Court of Appeals
In the case first entitled, an attachment was issued and a motion was made to vacate it, apparently upon the ground that the summons had not been served within 30 days, upon the defendants, as required by section 638 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The motion was granted upon that ground and then the plaintiff appealed to the General Term where the order of the Special Term was reversed. The defendants appealed to this court.
Read the full summary
In the case first entitled, an attachment was issued and a motion was made to vacate it, apparently upon the ground that the summons had not been served within 30 days, upon the defendants, as required by section 638 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The motion was granted upon that ground and then the plaintiff appealed to the General Term where the order of the Special Term was reversed. The defendants appealed to this court. The court here say: “ We are of opinion that the decision of the General Term was right. It is true that section 638 requires that the summons shall be served within 30…
1Opinion of the Court
Earl, d\,
reads for affirmance of order in case first above entitled, and for dismissal of appeal in the other two cases.
All concur. -
- Ordered .accordingly.
2Cited by5 opinions
- Clare v. . LockardNew York Court of Appeals · 1890
- Logan v. Greenwich Trust Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1911
- Clare v. LockardNew York Supreme Court · 1887
- Tuller v. . BeckNew York Court of Appeals · 1888
- Tuller v. BeckNew York Supreme Court · 1887