From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Teplitzky v. Lippman

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department
Mar 25, 1932
143 Misc. 244 (N.Y. App. Term 1932)

Opinion

March 25, 1932.

Appeal from the City Court of the City of New York, county of New York.

Levine Gold [Irving Levine of counsel], for the appellant.

Louis Cohn, for the respondents.


Service of the summons by leaving it at the office of the Secretary of State in the city of New York, coupled with compliance by plaintiff with the other provisions of section 52 Veh. Traf. of the Vehicle and Traffic Law (as amd. by Laws of 1930, chap. 57), sufficed to give the court jurisdiction of the defendants. ( Stoibor v. Marinacci, 142 Misc. 345; affd., 235 A.D. 714.)

Order reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion denied.

All concur; present, LYDON, FRANKENTHALER and UNTERMYER, JJ.


Summaries of

Teplitzky v. Lippman

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department
Mar 25, 1932
143 Misc. 244 (N.Y. App. Term 1932)
Case details for

Teplitzky v. Lippman

Case Details

Full title:WILLIAM TEPLITZKY, Appellant, v. WILLIAM LIPPMAN and Another, Respondents

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department

Date published: Mar 25, 1932

Citations

143 Misc. 244 (N.Y. App. Term 1932)
256 N.Y.S. 303

Citing Cases

Stoibor v. Marinacci

[*] Affg. 139 Misc. 838. See, also, Teplitzky v. Lippman ( 143 Misc. 244).…

Keller v. American Sales Book Co.

Perhaps the weight of authority supports the contention of the plaintiff that service upon the foreign…