Legal Opinion

Dougherty v. Seigle

New York Supreme Court

Decided June 4, 1943PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the CourtF. E. Johnson, J.

The defendant, a resident of New Jersey at the time of the highway accident, and continuously since then, was served with a summons under section 52 of the Vehicle and Traffic Law on a date that was beyond the statutory period for bringing such a suit; he has pleaded the Statute of Limitations, and the issue of fact raised thereby (whether he was *675doing business in this State) has been directed to be tried as a separate issue. He claims that since he was doing business here continuously after the accident he could have been served, and the Statute of Limitations was thus running, and had run…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Comey v. . United Surety Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1916
  2. Wood v. . Erie Railway CompanyNew York Court of Appeals · 1878
  3. Mack v. MendelsNew York Court of Appeals · 1928
  4. Bode v. FlynnWisconsin Supreme Court · 1934
  5. Chemung Canal Bank v. LowerySupreme Court of the United States · 1876

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Huber v. RebayDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1944

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

Powered by the Exa API