Mazer v. Gerstinblith

Full title: HENRY MAZER, Respondent, v. MAX GERSTINBLITH, Appellant

Court: Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: Apr 21, 1939

256 App. Div. 671 (N.Y. App. Div. 1939)

Opinion

April 21, 1939.

Appeal from Supreme Court of New York County.

J. Frederic Rosenfeld of counsel [ Goldman Frier, attorneys], for the appellant.

Francis Finkelhor, for the respondent.

Present — MARTIN, P.J., O'MALLEY, TOWNLEY, COHN and CALLAHAN, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

An order for substituted service of a summons upon a natural person must direct that service be made at his residence except in an instance where such residence cannot be found. (Civ. Prac. Act, § 231.)

Upon the proof presented, the Special Term was justified in finding that the address at which substituted service upon defendant was directed by the court's order, was, in fact, the defendant's residence. (Cf. Johnson v. Diamond, 208 App. Div. 639.)

The order should be affirmed, with twenty dollars costs and disbursements to the respondent.

PER CURIAM.

Order unanimously affirmed, with twenty dollars costs and disbursements.