Borello v. Trustees of Central Presbyterian Church

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Borello v. Trustees of Central Presbyterian Church

233 A.D.2d 212, 650 N.Y.S.2d 525, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11795

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

DecidedNovember 19, 1996

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 233 A.D.2d 212 (Borello v. Trustees of Central Presbyterian Church) 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

Borello v. Trustees of Central Presbyterian Church, 233 A.D.2d 212, 650 N.Y.S.2d 525, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11795 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

Order of the Appellate Term, of the Supreme Court, First Department (Parness, J. P., McCooe and Glen, JJ.), entered February 22, 1995, which affirmed the order of Civil Court, New York County (Wilfred O’Connor, J.), entered on or about May 25, 1994, granting defendant’s motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Defendant demonstrated that its worker who was served was not authorized to receive process. There was no competent evidence adduced at the traverse hearing of any inquiry by the process server regarding the authority of the person served, nor was there any indication that the person served made any representation to the process server of having authority to receive service on behalf of the corporate defendant. Moreover, plaintiff failed to demonstrate that defendant had been served "in a manner which, objectively viewed, [was] calculated to give the corporation fair notice” (Fashion Page v Zurich Ins. Co., 50 NY2d 265, 272). We have considered plaintiff’s remaining contentions, and find them to be without merit. Concur— Sullivan, J. P., Ellerin, Tom and Andrias, JJ.

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

Order of the Appellate Term, of the Supreme Court, First Department (Parness, J. P., McCooe and Glen, JJ.), entered February 22, 1995, which affirmed the order of Civil Court, New York County (Wilfred O’Connor, J.), entered on or about May 25, 1994, granting defendant’s motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Defendant demonstrated that its worker who was served was not authorized to receive process. There was no competent evidence adduced at the traverse hearing of any inquiry by the process server regarding the authority of the person served, nor was there any indication that the person served made any representation to the process server of having authority to receive service on behalf of the corporate defendant. Moreover, plaintiff failed to demonstrate that defendant had been served "in a manner which, objectively viewed, [was] calculated to give the corporation fair notice” (Fashion Page v Zurich Ins. Co., 50 NY2d 265, 272). We have considered plaintiff’s remaining contentions, and find them to be without merit. Concur— Sullivan, J. P., Ellerin, Tom and Andrias, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

233 A.D.2d 212, 650 N.Y.S.2d 525, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11795, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/borello-v-trustees-of-central-presbyterian-church-nyappdiv-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack