Legal Opinion
Hirsch v. Albany Savings Bank
New York City Court
Decided July 26, 1948PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtHerzog, J.
The third party defendants, appearing specially, have moved to vacate and set aside the service of the third party summons. The grounds asserted are briefly: That section 193-a of the Civil Practice Act, and rule 54 of the Rules of Civil Practice, do not apply to actions in Albany City Court; and, further, that if they be so construed, they would be in contravention of section 18 of article VI of the Constitution of the State of New York because this would be an attempt to confer equity jurisdiction upon an inferior court.
The motion must be granted because it is my opinion that the…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Chapman v. . ForbesNew York Court of Appeals · 1890
- Clark v. . MosherNew York Court of Appeals · 1887
- Realty Associates, Inc. v. StoothoffAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1940
- Lotz v. Standard Vulcanite Pan Co.Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1917
- Mason v. Metropolitan Life InsuranceAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1939
3Cited by4 opinions
- Thomas J. Nolan, Inc. v. Martin & William Smith, Inc.City of New York Municipal Court · 1949
- Bernstein v. Albany Garage, Inc.Albany City Court · 1960
- H. G. Fischer & Co. v. Lincoln Rochester Trust Co.Rochester City Court · 1949
- Hirsch v. Albany Savings BankAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1949