Legal Opinion

Hohmann & Barnard, Inc. v. Combined Welder & Machine Corp.

New York Supreme Court

Decided September 9, 1959Published

1Opinion of the CourtJ. Irwin Shapiro, J.

Motion 11 for an order vacating and setting aside the service of the summons herein on the ground that the said defendant was enticed into the office of the attorney for the plaintiff for the purpose of deceitfully effecting such service.”

The plaintiff argues that defendant was not enticed into the office of its attorney and the defendant argues that its officer was so enticed. A question of fact is thus raised which could not be determined without a hearing. However, as the court *905sees it, a determination of the factual issue is not germane to a proper resolution of this motion for, even if…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Gumperz v. HofmannAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1935
  2. Gumperz v. HofmannNew York Court of Appeals · 1936
  3. Metcalf v. ClarkNew York Supreme Court · 1864
  4. Snelling & Baxter v. WatrousNew York Court of Chancery · 1830
  5. Olean Street Railway Co. v. Fairmount Construction Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1900

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

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

Powered by the Exa API