Legal Opinion

Rosenblatt v. Bridgeport Metal Goods Manufacturing Co.

New York Supreme Court

Decided November 15, 1918PublishedCited by 4 opinions

Motion to vacate service of summons.

1Opinion of the CourtManning, J.

The plaintiff commenced these two actions against the defendant on or about the 10th day of January, 1918, by the service of a summons and notice upon one George G. Beers, who at the time was vice-president of the defendant corporation. The defendant shortly thereafter specially moved to vacate *93the service upon the ground that it was a foreign corporation and was1 not engaged in business within the state of New York. The motion to vacate the service was denied, as was also a motion for a reargument. The defendant then appealed to the Appellate Division from the orders above made and that…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Tauza v. . Susquehanna Coal Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1917
  2. Philadelphia & Reading Railway Co. v. McKibbinSupreme Court of the United States · 1917
  3. Krakowski v. White Sulphur Springs, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1916

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Netherlands Shipmortgage Corporation, Ltd. v. Mark Madias and Nicholas T.K. SkarvelisCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1983
  2. Lebanon Mill Co. v. KuhnCity of New York Municipal Court · 1932
  3. Berkshire Engineering Corp. v. Scott-Paine, New York County Courts1961
  4. Ideal Werke A. G. Fur Drahtlose Telephonie v. RoosCity of New York Municipal Court · 1931

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API