From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Weil v. New York Central Railroad Company

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Mar 20, 1923
139 N.E. 738 (N.Y. 1923)

Summary

In Weil v. N.Y.C.R.R. Co. (235 N.Y. 570) we held that service of a summons upon a cause of action arising during federal control (as did the action at bar) upon a person designated by section 206(b) of the Transportation Act of 1920 as a person to be served with process in such actions, in which summons the carrier and not the agent designated by the president is named as defendant, did not constitute the bringing of an action against said agent or his principal, i.e., the agent appointed by the president under the Transportation Act of 1920.

Summary of this case from Lawrey v. Hines

Opinion

Argued February 27, 1923

Decided March 20, 1923

Edward B. Twombly for appellants.

William Mann and Alexander S. Lyman for respondent.


Order affirmed, with costs; first, third and fourth questions certified answered in the negative; second question not answered; no opinion.

Concur: HISCOCK, Ch. J., HOGAN, CARDOZO, POUND, McLAUGHLIN and ANDREWS, JJ. Dissenting: CRANE, J.


Summaries of

Weil v. New York Central Railroad Company

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Mar 20, 1923
139 N.E. 738 (N.Y. 1923)

In Weil v. N.Y.C.R.R. Co. (235 N.Y. 570) we held that service of a summons upon a cause of action arising during federal control (as did the action at bar) upon a person designated by section 206(b) of the Transportation Act of 1920 as a person to be served with process in such actions, in which summons the carrier and not the agent designated by the president is named as defendant, did not constitute the bringing of an action against said agent or his principal, i.e., the agent appointed by the president under the Transportation Act of 1920.

Summary of this case from Lawrey v. Hines
Case details for

Weil v. New York Central Railroad Company

Case Details

Full title:EDMOND WEIL et al., Doing Business under the Firm Name of ALPHONSE WEIL…

Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York

Date published: Mar 20, 1923

Citations

139 N.E. 738 (N.Y. 1923)
139 N.E. 738

Citing Cases

Sapone v. New York Central H.R.R.R. Co.

(2) They would be entirely new parties with different rights. ( Pelzer v. United Dredging Co., 200 A.D. 646;…

Lawrey v. Hines

Such references must be disregarded. In Weil v. N.Y.C.R.R. Co. ( 235 N.Y. 570) we held that service of a…