Legal Opinion

Buford v. New York Iron Mine

The Superior Court of the City of New York and Buffalo

Decided May 7, 1888Published

Appeal from special term; Truax, Judge. In this action of Richard G. Buford against the Mew York Iron Mine.and others an order authorizing personal service without the state was made, which contained no direction as to publication. An order to show cause why it should not be set aside was made, but,this order did not fix any time for its service, and a preliminary objection was made on that ground.

Read the full summary

Appeal from special term; Truax, Judge. In this action of Richard G. Buford against the Mew York Iron Mine.and others an order authorizing personal service without the state was made, which contained no direction as to publication. An order to show cause why it should not be set aside was made, but,this order did not fix any time for its service, and a preliminary objection was made on that ground. The hearing was adjourned, and the motion was afterwards argued on the merits, the special term rendering the following opinion, vacating the first order: “I think that the preliminary objection…

1Opinion of the CourtFreedman, J.

As both parties have conceded that an adjournment of the motion was had, and that the motion was argued below on the merits, the preliminary objection raised below should not be considered on the present appeal. The merits of the motion depend upon the construction of section 440 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The point that the order which was vacated contained no direction whatever as to a publication of the summons, but only an authorization for personal service without the state, was passed upon in Ritten v. Griffith, 16 Hun, 454, and decided adversely to the appellant. The case referred…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Abrahams v. MitchellNew York Supreme Court · 1859

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

Powered by the Exa API