Case Name: James F. Drew, Respondent, v. Northwestern Corporation and Another, Defendants. Northwestern Corporation, Appellant
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Term
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1929-03-07
Citations: 133 Misc. 706
Docket Number: 
Parties: James F. Drew, Respondent, v. Northwestern Corporation and Another, Defendants. Northwestern Corporation, Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York Miscellaneous Reports
Volume: 133
Pages: 706–707

Head Matter:
James F. Drew, Respondent, v. Northwestern Corporation and Another, Defendants. Northwestern Corporation, Appellant.
Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department,
March 7, 1929.
Samuel Bikoff, for the appellant.
Joseph W. Landes, for the respondent.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
Service of the summons in this case on the foreign corporate defendant was made by delivery thereof to the person in whose possession property of the defendant was found available for attachment. Section 48 of the Municipal Court Code, in so far as it authorizes such service upon a non-resident defendant, is unconstitutional. (Nerenberg v. Keith, 101 Misc. 551.) The fact that tangible property was levied on by the marshal would not change the situation. The test of the constitutionality of the statute is what might be done under its terms, not what was done in a particular case. , *
Order reversed, with ten dollars costs, and motion granted, with ten dollars costs.
All concur; present, Lydon, Callahan and Peters, JJ.