Bonez v. Coombe

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Bonez v. Coombe

228 A.D.2d 673, 646 N.Y.2d 17, 646 N.Y.S.2d 17, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7413

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedJune 24, 1996

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 228 A.D.2d 673 (Bonez v. Coombe) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Bonez v. Coombe, 228 A.D.2d 673, 646 N.Y.2d 17, 646 N.Y.S.2d 17, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7413 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

[674]*674The record contains no indication that proof of service of the notice of petition and petition was filed within the 15-day period prescribed by CPLR 306-b (a). The appellants did not appear within that period. More fundamentally, there is no indication that the petitioner ever accomplished service in accordance with the terms of the order to show cause. This proceeding was therefore dismissed by operation of law upon the expiration of the 15-day period prescribed in CPLR 306-b (a) (see, Naudus v Begel, 216 AD2d 373; Matter of Williams v Williams, 215 AD2d 980; Matter of Barsalow v City of Troy, 208 AD2d 1144; Matter of Solomon v Marks, 164 Misc 2d 387; see also, Ayton v Bean, 60 NY2d 768, 770; Matter of Watson v LeFevre, 108 AD2d 1067). Bracken, J. P., O’Brien, Goldstein and Florio, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

[674]*674The record contains no indication that proof of service of the notice of petition and petition was filed within the 15-day period prescribed by CPLR 306-b (a). The appellants did not appear within that period. More fundamentally, there is no indication that the petitioner ever accomplished service in accordance with the terms of the order to show cause. This proceeding was therefore dismissed by operation of law upon the expiration of the 15-day period prescribed in CPLR 306-b (a) (see, Naudus v Begel, 216 AD2d 373; Matter of Williams v Williams, 215 AD2d 980; Matter of Barsalow v City of Troy, 208 AD2d 1144; Matter of Solomon v Marks, 164 Misc 2d 387; see also, Ayton v Bean, 60 NY2d 768, 770; Matter of Watson v LeFevre, 108 AD2d 1067). Bracken, J. P., O’Brien, Goldstein and Florio, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

228 A.D.2d 673, 646 N.Y.2d 17, 646 N.Y.S.2d 17, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7413, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bonez-v-coombe-nyappdiv-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack