Van Mater v. Post
Opinion of the Court
The defendant in this action is a resident of the State of New Jersey. He was served personally in that State with a copy of the summons and complaint herein, pursuant to. the provisions of an order for publication of the summons or for personal service without the State, based upon the summons, the complaint, and affidavits of the plaintiff and his attorney. The defendant has appeared specially for the purpose of moving to set aside the order for substituted service, and from an order denying his motion he now appeals.
The circumstances under which an order for the publication, or for personal service without the State, may be made are prescribed in section 439 of the Code of Civil Procedure. In Bryan v. University Pub. Co. of N. Y. (112 N. Y. 382) it was held that this section required the same conditions as were prescribed in section 135 of the former Code of Procedure and that no.order of publication of the summons could be made “unless a cause of action arises within the State, or the defendant has property therein, and the court has jurisdiction over the subject of the action.” This ruling was followed in Paget v. Stevens (143 N. Y. 172) and numerous other cases of which the most recent is Grant v. Cobre Grande Copper Co. (126 App. Div. 750). The appellant makes numerous objections to the sufficiency of the papers on which the order of publication of the summons herein was granted, but it will be necessary for the purposes-of this appeal to consider but few of them. Prom the complaint
. This language falls far short of an allegation that the defendant had any property within the State of New York. It states that a writ of attachment has been issued, but it does not state that a levy was made under the writ. It states that the defendant has an interest in the estate of his deceased father, but it does not state whether said decedent died a resident of this State or whether the decedent’s estate was being administered in this State or whether any of the property of the decedent was located in this State. Under these circumstances the papers on which the order of publication was based faff clearly to show the existence of the jurisdictional facts which are necessary to sustain the order. Had the cause of action pleaded in the complaint herein arisen within this State a different question would be presented.
Jenks, P. J., Hirschberg, Thomas and Rich, JJ., concurred.
Order of -Special Term reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion to vacate order of publication and to set aside the service of process made thereunder granted, with ten dollars costs.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.