Legal Opinion

In re the Estate of Marko

New York Surrogate's Court

Decided February 9, 1968PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Samuel J. Silverman, S.

This is a motion to vacate an order for substituted service in a discovery proceeding under SCPA 2103. The ground of the motion is that substituted service is not available in a discovery proceeding and that the method stated in SCPA 2103 (subd. 5) is exclusive.

SCPA 2103 (subd. 5) provides: “ Service of any order herein provided must be made by delivery of a certified copy thereof to the person or persons therein named and the payment or tender to each of the sum required to be paid to a witness as a subpoena fee.”

On the literal reading of the statute, movant has a…

2Cases cited2 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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Lamb v. VergoAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1987
  2. In re the Estate of MirskyNew York Surrogate's Court · 1989
  3. Wagner v. WagnerNew York Supreme Court · 1982
  4. Matter of PollinaAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2020

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

Powered by the Exa API