From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Maguire v. Yellow Taxicab Corporation, Speck

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
May 31, 1938
278 N.Y. 576 (N.Y. 1938)

Summary

In Maguire v. Yellow Taxi Corp. (278 N.Y. 576), it was held that service upon a defendant who resided in Connecticut was timely because his absence from the State prevented the statute from running.

Summary of this case from Matthews v. Pisani

Opinion

Argued May 16, 1938

Decided May 31, 1938

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

Walter L. Glenney and Chauncey L. Grant for appellant.

Nathan Ottinger for respondents.



Order affirmed, with costs, and question certified answered in the negative. No opinion.

Concur: CRANE, Ch. J., LEHMAN, O'BRIEN, HUBBS, LOUGHRAN, FINCH and RIPPEY, JJ.


Summaries of

Maguire v. Yellow Taxicab Corporation, Speck

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
May 31, 1938
278 N.Y. 576 (N.Y. 1938)

In Maguire v. Yellow Taxi Corp. (278 N.Y. 576), it was held that service upon a defendant who resided in Connecticut was timely because his absence from the State prevented the statute from running.

Summary of this case from Matthews v. Pisani

In Maguire v. Yellow Taxi Corp. (278 N.Y. 576), it was held that service upon a defendant who resided in Connecticut was timely because his absence from the State prevented the statute from running.

Summary of this case from Matthews v. Pisani
Case details for

Maguire v. Yellow Taxicab Corporation, Speck

Case Details

Full title:FRANK A. MAGUIRE et al., Respondents, v. YELLOW TAXICAB CORPORATION et…

Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York

Date published: May 31, 1938

Citations

278 N.Y. 576 (N.Y. 1938)
16 N.E.2d 110

Citing Cases

Staten v. Weiss

A statute that tolls the running of the statute of limitations in favor of a defendant who is out of the…

King v. Killum

"1. While a designation or appointment, voluntary or involuntary, made in pursuance of law, of a resident or…