sufficient compliance requirement in New York

1941There is a later case (Matter of Erikson v. Cohen, 243 App. Div. 1 ) which might seem to be in conflict with the decision in the O’Keeffe case.

1918In the Appellate Division, second department, in Maisch v. City of New York, 134 App. Div. 201 , it was held that the indorsement “ damages to property ’ ’ was a sufficient compliance, but the same court held later in Weiner v. Yale Knitting Mills, 138 App. Div. 533 , that an indorsement “ goods sold and delivered ” was insufficient.

1918In the Appellate Division, second department, in Maisch v. City of New York, 134 App. Div. 201 , it was held that the indorsement “ damages to property ’ ’ was a sufficient compliance, but the same court held later in Weiner v. Yale Knitting Mills, 138 App. Div. 533 , that an indorsement “ goods sold and delivered ” was insufficient.

1906By section 485 of the Code of Criminal Procedure the judgment of conviction is required to state. “ briefly the offense for which the conviction - has been had,” and it was' held the- words “ assault in the third degree ” were a sufficient compliance with that requirement, as it named the- offense used by section 219 of the Penal Code. .(Matter of Bartholomew, 106 App. Div. 371 .) In the case at bar the certificate of conviction was made by the justice of the peace in the form required by section 721 of the Code of • Criminal Procedure in such cáse.

1898(Missano v. The Mayor, 17 App. Div. 536 .) It was also shown by the plaintiff that an attempt at service of the necessary notice upon the counsel to the corporation was made by mailing it.

1897In London v. Townshend ( 112 N. Y. 93 ), Mr. Waddell, general assignee in bankruptcy, was made a defendant without any addition whatever- to his individual name, and he appeared by an attorney, the notice being in the general form specifying an appearance " for the defendants in the action.” So far as the' record, of the case on appeal shows, there was no reference - either in the -summons and complaint or in-the proceedings at any stage of the nature of his title or interest in the premises.

1893Allen v. Patterson, 7 N. Y. 476 ; Farron v. Sherwood, 17 N. Y. 227, 229 ; Hosley v. Black, 28 N. Y. 438 ; Hurst v. Litchfield, 39 N. Y. 377 ; Bank v. Wheelock, 45 N. Y.

1893Allen v. Patterson, 7 N. Y. 476 ; Farron v. Sherwood, 17 N. Y. 227, 229 ; Hosley v. Black, 28 N. Y. 438 ; Hurst v. Litchfield, 39 N. Y. 377 ; Bank v. Wheelock, 45 N. Y.

1893Allen v. Patterson, 7 N. Y. 476 ; Farron v. Sherwood, 17 N. Y. 227, 229 ; Hosley v. Black, 28 N. Y. 438 ; Hurst v. Litchfield, 39 N. Y. 377 ; Bank v. Wheelock, 45 N. Y.

1893Allen v. Patterson, 7 N. Y. 476 ; Farron v. Sherwood, 17 N. Y. 227, 229 ; Hosley v. Black, 28 N. Y. 438 ; Hurst v. Litchfield, 39 N. Y. 377 ; Bank v. Wheelock, 45 N. Y.

1873Patrick, 22 How., 1 ).

1873If such was the case, he should have procured their consent to said terms in writing, or at least made a memorandum thereof upon his minutes at the time, which, I think, would have been a sufficient compliance with the requirement of the Code (Philbin v. Patrick, 22 How.