Brassack v. Interborough Rapid Transit Co.
Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York
Appeal from an order of the City Court of the city of New York directing the plaintiff to furnish security for costs.
1Opinion of the CourtSeabury, J.
The plaintiff is regularly employed at 41½ Division street in the borough of Manhattan, city of ¡New York, as an operator on cloaks and suits.
The question presented for' determination is whether, under the circumstances recited above, the plaintiff can he said to have “ an office for the regular transaction of business in person, within the city of ¡New York.” Code Civ. Pro., § 3160.
The word “ office,” as used in this statute, means a place where service is rendered or business is done. The expression “ an office for the regular transaction of business in *191person ” does not necessarily mean…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Lewis v. DavisNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1878
3Cited by5 opinions
- Hanley v. Eastern Steamship Corp.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1915
- Tribune Co. v. Approved Personnel, Inc.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 1959
- Coward v. Moore, New York County Courts1956
- Orlikowski v. StrashAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1962
- Landt v. StarkNew York Supreme Court · 1962