99 N.Y.S. 206 | N.Y. Sup. Ct. | 1906
The respondent’s answer and return to the alternative writ of mandamus, inclosed in a properly sealed, postpaid wrapper, correctly addressed to the relator’s attorney, was deposited in the post office in the borough of Manhattan, city of Hew York, on April 23, 1906, and was received by him through the mail on the following day. On June fourth the relator served a copy of his demurrer upon the respondent’s attorneys, who returned the same with the indorsement that it was “ not served in time.” The relator’s counsel claims that since the answer and return was served by mail his client had forty days after it was received within which to serve the demurrer, and that service of.the same on the day in question was on time. The respondent’s counsel, on the other hand, contends that the relator’s time to plead ran from the day of the mailing of the answer and return and not from the day of its receipt, and that the de
Motion denied, with ten dollars costs.