Case ID: misc2d_49/html/0882-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      Per Curiam.\n    ", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Louis Roder et al., Respondents, v. Nathan Goldsmith, Appellant.
    Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department,
    March 3, 1966.
    
      P err ell, Nielsen & Stephens (Thomas O. Perr ell and John Nielsen of counsel), for appellant.
   Per Curiam.

The Civil Court lacked the power to assert in personam jurisdiction over the defendant on the basis of personal service of process in Nassau County. The action is founded On an out-of-city tort; the defendant is a nonresident of New York City, and the fact that he is regularly employed within the city will not justify extraterritorial service.

The orders should be reversed, with $10 costs, defendant’s motions granted and the complaint dismissed, with costs. .

Hofstadteb, J. P., Hecht and Gold, JJ., concur.

Orders reversed, etc.