Jacobs v. Hooker
New York Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtEdmonds, J.
That makes no difference. The risk of miscarriage falls upon him to whom the paper was directed. The rule says that such a service shall be a good one; and of necessity, therefore, the risk must be with the party to whom it is sent. Both judgments were irregular and must be set aside; but without costs. We allow no costs on motions, unless the motions are rendered necessary for the attainment of some substantial right in the cause; except sometimes we may allow them by way of punishment. My only doubt is whether I ought not to charge the defendant with the costs of setting aside his judgment.…
2Cited by9 opinions
- Hurley v. . OlcottNew York Court of Appeals · 1910
- McCoy v. State Employment BureauOhio Court of Appeals · 1947
- Schroedel Corp. v. State Highway CommissionWisconsin Supreme Court · 1968
- Boeck v. State Highway CommissionWisconsin Supreme Court · 1967
- Manchester v. Van BruntNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1893
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.