Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York, 1900

Langman v. Milbury

Langman v. Milbury
Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · Decided May 1, 1900
64 N.Y.S. 465; 31 Misc. 459 (New York Supplement)

Counsel

Henry L. Maxson, for appellant., C, L.. Schurz, for respondent.

Langman v. Milbury

Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM.

The fact that the defendant had, at the time of the trial, a place of business in the city of New York, does not satisfy the jurisdictional requirement. Proof of actual residence will alone suffice (Routenberg v. Schweitzer, 29 Misc. Rep. 653, 61 N. Y. Supp. 84, affirmed in [April 2, 1900] 63 N. Y. Supp. 746); and, since this proof is not furnished by the record, the judgment must be reversed, and a new trial ordered. As the question was raised upon the trial, the reversal will be with costs to abide the event. Judgment reversed, and a new trial ordered, with costs to abide the event.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.