AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes

STANLEY ROSMAN, Respondent, v. JAMES CLARK, Doing Business as CLARK ASSOCIATES, et al., Defendants, and CARD KEY SYSTEMS, INC., Appellant.

Order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated November 9, 1966, reversed and motion granted, with $10 costs and disbursements. The method of service of process chosen by plaintiff is not authorized and is therefore invalid (CPLR 313, 311; Business Corporation Law, §§ 307, 306). It further appears that the facts, so far as they appear in this record, would not be sufficient basis for jurisdiction ( Kramer v. Vogl, 17 N.Y.2d 27; Feathers v. McLucas, 15 N.Y.2d 443, 458, 464). Ughetta, Acting P.J., Christ, Brennan, Hopkins and Munder, JJ., concur.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

ROSMAN v. CLARK
(Mar 6, 1967)