Per Curiam.
Under the special facts and circumstances of this case, it was error to strike out the testimony of the process server as to his habit and custom in making substituted service (32 C. J. S., Evidence, § 581; Richardson, Evidence [9th ed.], § 190; Matter of Kellum, 52 N.Y. 517). The service of process was not contested until approximately five and a half years after entry of judgment, at a time when the process server no longer had...
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
- Updated daily.
- Uncompromising quality.
- Complete, Accurate, Current.
