## Facts

- A buyer contracted with a nonresident seller to purchase real property located in Westchester County, New York.
- The buyer sued in New York Supreme Court for specific performance after the seller allegedly breached the contract to convey the land.
- The seller was not personally served within New York and did not appear.
- The seller was personally served in Connecticut with the summons and verified complaint under New York procedural statutes permitting extraterritorial service in certain property actions.
- The seller moved to vacate service as insufficient to bind him in New York; the motion was denied, and the Appellate Division affirmed.
- Two questions were certified on appeal: (1) whether the New York court obtained jurisdiction on these facts, and (2) whether the court could direct a sheriff to convey the property under Civil Practice Act § 979 if specific performance were decreed.

## Issues

1. Whether a New York court obtains jurisdiction to grant in rem or quasi in rem relief affecting title to New York real property in a specific-performance action when a nonresident defendant is served only outside New York and does not appear.
2. Whether, without personal jurisdiction over the nonresident defendant, the court may decree specific performance in a manner that transfers title by directing a sheriff’s conveyance under Civil Practice Act § 979.

## Decision

- The Court of Appeals affirmed.
- It held that out-of-state personal service authorized by Civil Practice Act §§ 232 and 235 was sufficient to support jurisdiction to render a judgment in rem affecting title to New York land in a specific-performance action.
- It held that, under Civil Practice Act § 979, the court could effectuate specific performance by directing the sheriff to execute a conveyance if the defendant did not comply, because the decree could operate on the property rather than impose an in personam obligation.
- Both certified questions were answered in the affirmative.

## Legal Principles

- A state court may exercise in rem or quasi in rem jurisdiction over real property located within the state to adjudicate interests in that property, even when the defendant is a nonresident not personally served in the state and not appearing, if statutory notice requirements are satisfied.
- Statutes authorizing extraterritorial service in actions “affecting the title” to in-state property extend to specific-performance claims for contracts to convey such property.
- When authorized by statute, equitable relief concerning land may be structured to operate directly on the res (including transfer of title through an officer’s conveyance), limiting the judgment’s effect to the defendant’s in-state property interest rather than imposing personal liability.

## Conclusion

The court upheld extraterritorial service and confirmed that a specific-performance decree concerning New York land may proceed as in rem relief: jurisdiction rests on the land’s presence in New York and statutory notice, and the transfer of title may be completed through a sheriff’s deed without personal jurisdiction over the nonresident seller.


Garfein v. McInnis, 248 N.Y. 261, 162 N.E. 73 (N.Y. 1928)