Case Name: Isidore Levy and Another, Doing Business as Levy & Schultz, Respondents, v. Esther Stein and Another, Appellants
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Term
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1927-11-16
Citations: 131 Misc. 39
Docket Number: 
Parties: Isidore Levy and Another, Doing Business as Levy & Schultz, Respondents, v. Esther Stein and Another, Appellants.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York Miscellaneous Reports
Volume: 131
Pages: 39–40

Head Matter:
Isidore Levy and Another, Doing Business as Levy & Schultz, Respondents, v. Esther Stein and Another, Appellants.
Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department,
November 16, 1927.
Matthew M. Levy, for the appellants.
Jerome J. Freedman, for the respondents.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
The order denying the motion of the defendants to vacate the warrant of seizure is reversed, with ten dollars costs, and the motion to vacate such warrant of seizure is granted, with ten dollars costs. Under the statute the defendants were entitled to five days' notice of the application for the warrant of seizure. This notice was required to be served upon them in the manner provided for personal service of summons. It affirmatively appears that this was not done. (See Mun. Ct. Code, § 72, as amd. by Laws of 1926, chap. 692.)
All concur; present, Delehanty, Lydon and Crain, JJ.