
    MARGOLIES v. BRETTSCHNEIDER.
    (Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department.
    April 10, 1913.)
    Courts (§ 189)—Municipal Court Act—Civil Action—Conversion.
    Where, in an action for conversion, a verified complaint was served with the summons, plaintiff was entitled to a provision in the judgment for the issuance of a body execution against defendant, though the copy of the summons was not indorsed, “Plaintiff claims defendant is liable to arrest and imprisonment in this case,” as provided by Municipal Court Act (Laws 1902, c. 580) § 39.
    [Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Courts, Cent. Dig. §§ 409, 412, 413, 429, 458; Dec. Dig. § 189.*]
    Appeal from Municipal Court, Borough of Manhattan, Second District.
    Action by Abraham Margolies against Samuel Brettschneider. From so much of a judgment in favor of plaintiff as denied plaintiff’s right to the insertion in the judgment of a provision for defendant’s arrest, he appeals. Modified and affirmed.
    
      Argued March term, 1913, before LEHMAN, GERARD, and DE-LANY, JJ.
    David Tim, of New York City, for appellant.
    
      
      For other cases see same topic & § number in Dec. & Am. Digs. 1907 to date, & Rep’r Indexes
    
   LEHMAN, J.

The plaintiff has recovered a judgment for conversion instituted by service of a summons and verified complaint. Apparently the copy of the summons served was not indorsed as provided by section 39 of the Municipal Court Act .(Laws 1902, c. 580), but inasmuch as the verified complaint was served with the summons an execution against the person could nevertheless issue.

Judgment should be modified by including a provision for execution against the person, and, as modified, affirmed, with costs to the appellant. All concur.  