Seligman v. Friedlander
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Appeal by the plaintiff, Joseph Seligman, from an order of the Supreme Court, made at the New York Special Term and entered in the office of the clerk of the county of New York on the 18th day of April, 19-10, denying the plaintiff’s motion to revive an action, and for leave to serve an amended and supplemental complaint.
1Opinion of the Court
McLaughlin, J.:
Action to recover for services alleged to have been rendered to the firm of A. Friedlander & Co., which was composed of defendant Friedlander and Albert S. Faber and Edwin Potosky. The action was Commenced in January, 1908, by service of the summons on Friedlander, who died in June, 1909. Faber and Potosky were never served with the summons, and on plaintiff’s application an order was entered discontinuing the action as to them. After the death of Friedlander, a motion was made to revive and continue the action in the name of his executors, and for leave to serve a supplemental…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Douglass v. . FerrisNew York Court of Appeals · 1893
- Potts v. . DounceNew York Court of Appeals · 1903
- Leggat v. LeggatAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1903
- County of Erie v. BaltzAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1908
- Hentz v. HavemeyerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1909
3Cited by4 opinions
- In re the Accounting of BlakeNew York Supreme Court · 1955
- Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co. v. Vernon Estates, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1933
- Colonial Country Club v. RichmondLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1932
- In re ForseDistrict Court, N.D. New York · 1910