Legal Opinion

Parker v. . Marco

New York Court of Appeals

Decided January 17, 1893PublishedCited by 69 opinions

Appeal from order of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, made FTovember 13, 1891, which reversed an order of the Special Term, setting-aside the service of a summons in the above-entitled action. The facts, so far as material, are stated in the opinion. The defendant was exempt from service, he being in the state for the sole purpose of attending the taking of testimony before a notary public in another action to which he was a party.

Read the full summary

Appeal from order of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, made FTovember 13, 1891, which reversed an order of the Special Term, setting-aside the service of a summons in the above-entitled action. The facts, so far as material, are stated in the opinion. The defendant was exempt from service, he being in the state for the sole purpose of attending the taking of testimony before a notary public in another action to which he was a party. (Meekins v. Smith, H Bl. 636; Norris v. Beach, 2 Johns. 294; Bours v. Tucherman, 7 id. 538; Hopkins v. Coburn, 1 Wend. 292;…

1Opinion of the CourtMaynard, J.

The defendant is a resident of South Carolina and an action had been there brought against him in the Federal Circuit Court by the plantiff, who is a resident of thig state. On April 6, 1892, the defendant came to the city of Mew York at the instance of the plaintiff to attend an examination of the plaintiff and his witnesses before a notary public, which by the agreement of the counsel for the respective parties had been set down for that date. The plaintiff procured the defendant’s assent to the examination upon the statement that he desired to be in readiness to try the cause at the…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Person v. . GrierNew York Court of Appeals · 1876
  2. Sanford v. ChaseNew York Supreme Court · 1824

3Cited by69 opinions

  1. Lamb v. SchmittSupreme Court of the United States · 1932
  2. Netograph Manufacturing Co. v. . ScrughamNew York Court of Appeals · 1910
  3. Minichiello v. RosenbergCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1968
  4. Higgins v. California Prune & Apricot Growers, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1922
  5. Chase National Bank v. TurnerNew York Court of Appeals · 1936

64 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