Brambir v. Seifert
Charles Brambir and Another v. Harry Seifert
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
Per Curiam.
We cannot assume that the 1924 amendment of section 1425 of the Civil Practice Act (added by Laws of 1921, chap. 199, as amd. by Laws of 1924, chap. 514), providing for judgment for rent, was intended, contrary to well-established principles, to warrant the entry of judgment for rent against a tenant not personally served with the precept or who had not appeared in the proceeding. .
Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs.
All concur; present, Bijur, O’Malley and Levy, JJ.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 11 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.