Pacek v. Ferrar
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the Court
— Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. Memorandum: No personal service of the summons and complaint in the foreclosure action was made on the respondent Ferrar. The entry of a deficiency judgment against him, therefore, was absolutely void for lack of jurisdiction of his person. The Supreme Court has inherent power to vacate a judgment so entered. (Civ. Prac. Act, § 1083; Matter of Rudgers, 250 App. Div. 359; Matter of Battalico v. Knickebocker Fireproofing Co., Id. 258; motion for leave to appeal denied, 274 N. Y. 641; Kamp v. Kamp, 59 id. 212.) Nor has Ferrar appeared…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Noble v. CrandallNew York Supreme Court · 1888
- In re the Summary Proceedings for Removal of Persons in Possession of Premises Alleged to Be Owned by RudgersAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1937
3Cited by5 opinions
- Wheelock v. WheelockAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1956
- Langer v. WiehlNew York Supreme Court · 1955
- Marco v. SachsNew York Supreme Court · 1960
- Cobb v. SelmonskyNew York Supreme Court · 1962
- Detzel v. DetzelNew York Supreme Court · 1959