Legal Opinion
Howard v. Marlin-Rockwell Corp.
New York Supreme Court
Decided August 1, 1935PublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the CourtPersonius, J.
The plaintiff appearing specially objected that the notice of motion and moving papers were not properly served. The papers were actually received in ample time. If service was technically insufficient, we think the time of the defendant to make the motions could and should be extended. (Civ. Prac. Act, § 98; Fiorello v. N. Y. Prot. Episcopal City Mission Society, 217 App. Div. 510, 512.) The objection is denied and the order may so recite.
It appears from the complaint in action No. 1 that August Henry Doering, a resident of Missouri, died at Elmira, N, Y., May 29, 1934, leaving personal…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Rogers v. Guaranty Trust Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1933
- Baker v. Baker, Eccles & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1917
- Helme v. . BuckelewNew York Court of Appeals · 1920
- Holmes v. . CampNew York Court of Appeals · 1916
- Murphy v. CrouseCalifornia Supreme Court · 1901
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Ray v. Fairfield County Trust Co.New York Supreme Court · 1959