Callahan v. Buck Hill Inn & Golf Club

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Callahan v. Buck Hill Inn & Golf Club

51 A.D.2d 990, 381 N.Y.S.2d 99, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11737

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

DecidedMarch 8, 1976

StatusPublished

This text of 51 A.D.2d 990 (Callahan v. Buck Hill Inn & Golf Club) 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

Callahan v. Buck Hill Inn & Golf Club, 51 A.D.2d 990, 381 N.Y.S.2d 99, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11737 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1976).

Pincite

Opinion

In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., defendants appeal from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, entered June 10, 1975, after a hearing, as denied their motion to dismiss the action for lack of personal jurisdiction. Order affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs. The proof offered by plaintiffs to establish that service was made upon a person authorized to accept service upon behalf of defendants was not overcome by defendants’ proof to the contrary. The hearing court was, therefore, warranted in determining, as it did, that the service was proper. Gulotta, P. J., Martuscello, Latham, Margett and Shapiro, JJ., concur.

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

In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., defendants appeal from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, entered June 10, 1975, after a hearing, as denied their motion to dismiss the action for lack of personal jurisdiction. Order affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs. The proof offered by plaintiffs to establish that service was made upon a person authorized to accept service upon behalf of defendants was not overcome by defendants’ proof to the contrary. The hearing court was, therefore, warranted in determining, as it did, that the service was proper. Gulotta, P. J., Martuscello, Latham, Margett and Shapiro, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

51 A.D.2d 990, 381 N.Y.S.2d 99, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11737, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/callahan-v-buck-hill-inn-golf-club-nyappdiv-1976.