Legal Opinion
Gertsenstein v. Peninsular & Oriental Steam Navigation Co.
City of New York Municipal Court
Decided April 29, 1952PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Max J. Wolff,
Referee. The defendant has moved to vacate service upon it of the summons in this action upon the ground that it is not present within this jurisdiction. It has by stipulation waived the question, which would otherwise be open, whether the summons was delivered to a proper person in accordance with section 229 of the Civil Practice Act.
The defendant is a British corporation and has not filed a certificate of doing business in this State. It is a shipping company which maintains service from England and intermediate European ports to the Far East and Australia. Its ships do not…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- International Shoe Co. v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
- United States v. Scophony Corp. of AmericaSupreme Court of the United States · 1948
- Bomze v. Nardis Sportswear, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1948
- Kilpatrick v. Texas & P. Ry. Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1948
- Sterling Novelty Corp. v. Frank & Hirsch Distributing Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1949
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Mr. And Mrs. A. T. Stanga v. McCormick Shipping CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1959
- Aquascutum of London, Inc. v. S.S. American ChampionCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1970
- Gelfand v. Tanner Motor Tours, Ltd.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1964
- Robbins v. RingNew York Supreme Court · 1957
- Shawe v. Wendy Wilson, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 1959
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.