J. H. Mohlman Co. v. Landwehr
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Appeal by the defendant, George Landwehr, from a judgment of the Municipal Court of the city of New York, borough of Brooklyn, in favor of the plaintiff, entered on the 25tli day of February, 1903, upon the decision of the court, with notice of an intention to bring up for review upon such appeal an order entered on the 26th day of February, 1903, denying the defendant’s motion to vacate a warrant of attachment theretofore granted herein.
1Opinion of the Court
Hirschberg, J.:
The judgment was entered by default as provided by section 91 of the Municipal Court Act of the city of New York (Laws of 1902, chap. 580). This is substantially the same provision as is made by section 2918 of the Code of Civil Procedure for the government óf Justices’ Courts, and requires that the court shall proceed to hear and determine the action, where the defendant has not appeared, and the summons has not been personally served upon him, but his property has been duly attached by virtue of a warrant which has not been vacated. In this case the summons was not personally…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Crowns v. VailNew York Supreme Court · 1889
- Tim v. . SmithNew York Court of Appeals · 1883
- Casola v. . VasquezNew York Court of Appeals · 1895
- Thompson v. DaterNew York Supreme Court · 1890
- Mechanics' & Traders' Bank v. LoucheimNew York Supreme Court · 1890
3Cited by13 opinions
- Eaton Factors Co. v. Double Eagle Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1962
- Rosenthal v. Rochester Button Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1989
- N. Dain's Sons Co. v. Thomas McNally Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1910
- Durkin v. PatenAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1904
- McDonald v. JarrabetAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1992
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.