Case ID: ad_208/html/0144-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Smith, J.:", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

John F. Murphy, Respondent, v. The Second Russian Insurance Company, Appellant.
    First Department,
    February 21, 1924.
    See head note in James & Co. v. Second Russian Ins. Co. (ante, p. 141).
    Appeal by the defendant, The Second Russian Insurance Company, from an order of the Supreme Court, made at the New York Special Term and entered in the office of the clerk of the county of New York on the 12th day of June, 1923, denying the defendant’s motion made under rule 107 of the Rules of Civil Practice to dismiss the complaint.
    
      William S. Thomson [Albert Massey of counsel], for the appellant.
    
      Hartwell Cabell [Blaine F. Sturgis of counsel], for the respondent.
   Smith, J.:

This appeal presents the same questions as are presented in the motion of James & Co. v. Second Russian Ins. Co. (208 App. Div. 141), with the exception that in this action the defendant did not appear generally. In my opinion that exception can make no difference, because the court clearly has jurisdiction of the defendant, irrespective of such general appearance, and the order should be affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, upon the opinion in the case of James & Co. v. Second Russian Ins. Co. (supra), decided herewith.

Clarke, P. J., Merrell, Finch and Martin, JJ., concur.

Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, with leave to defendant to answer within twenty days from service of order upon payment of said costs.