Legal Opinion · Dissent

Co-Ordinating Corp. v.Mengel Co.

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Decided June 21, 1934Published

1DissentShientag, J.

I dissent in part.

The defendant, respondent, a foreign corporation, moved to vacate the service of the summons and complaint on the ground that it was not doing business in this State. The plaintiff, appellant, submitted no affidavits in opposition. It rested on the defendant’s papers. The court below appointed a referee to take testimony and report “as to whether the defendant is doing business within the State of New York and as to whether this court has jurisdiction over the person of the said defendant.” Pending the report of the referee the motion was held in abeyance.

From each and every…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Shillman v. ToulsonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1925
  2. Buchholtz v. Florida East Coast Railway Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1901

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API