Boyd v. Kimmel

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Boyd v. Kimmel

106 A.D.2d 539, 483 N.Y.S.2d 64, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 20632

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided December 24, 1984·Published

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for legal malpractice, defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Feldman, J.), dated December 16, 1983 and made after a traverse hearing, which denied his motion to dismiss the action on the ground of lack of personal jurisdiction.

Order affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The record supports Special Term’s conclusion that (1) the process server exercised due diligence in his unsuccessful attempts to effectuate personal service upon defendant pursuant to CPLR 308 (subds 1, 2) and (2) substituted service pursuant to CPLR 308 (subd 4) was properly resorted to and effectuated. Titone, J. P., Mangano, Brown and Rubin, JJ., concur.

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

In an action to recover damages for legal malpractice, defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Feldman, J.), dated December 16, 1983 and made after a traverse hearing, which denied his motion to dismiss the action on the ground of lack of personal jurisdiction.

Order affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The record supports Special Term’s conclusion that (1) the process server exercised due diligence in his unsuccessful attempts to effectuate personal service upon defendant pursuant to CPLR 308 (subds 1, 2) and (2) substituted service pursuant to CPLR 308 (subd 4) was properly resorted to and effectuated. Titone, J. P., Mangano, Brown and Rubin, JJ., concur.

Boyd v. Kimmel, 106 A.D.2d 539, 483 N.Y.S.2d 64, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 20632 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1984).

Pincite

106 A.D.2d 539 (Boyd v. Kimmel) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.