Chase v. Achtner

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Chase v. Achtner

40 A.D.2d 1009, 339 N.Y.S.2d 126, 1972 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2994

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

DecidedDecember 26, 1972

StatusPublished

This text of 40 A.D.2d 1009 (Chase v. Achtner) 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

Chase v. Achtner, 40 A.D.2d 1009, 339 N.Y.S.2d 126, 1972 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2994 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1972).

Pincite

Opinion

In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., [1010]*1010defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated August 23, 1971, which granted plaintiffs’ motion to strike a defense of lack of jurisdiction of defendant’s person, contained in his answer, and denied defendant’s cross motion to dismiss the complaint on the ground of said defense. Order reversed, on the law, with $10 costs and disbursements; plaintiffs’ motion denied; and defendant’s motion granted. Where a process server’s affidavit falsely alleges personal service of the summons on the defendant and, in fact, the summons was received by the defendant’s estranged wife and subsequently mailed by her to the defendant at his own residence, we hold that personal service pursuant to CPLR 308 has not been effected (see McDonald v. Ames Supply Co., 22 N Y 2d 111). Latham, Acting P. J., Gulotta, Christ, Brennan and Benjamin, 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., [1010]*1010defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated August 23, 1971, which granted plaintiffs’ motion to strike a defense of lack of jurisdiction of defendant’s person, contained in his answer, and denied defendant’s cross motion to dismiss the complaint on the ground of said defense. Order reversed, on the law, with $10 costs and disbursements; plaintiffs’ motion denied; and defendant’s motion granted. Where a process server’s affidavit falsely alleges personal service of the summons on the defendant and, in fact, the summons was received by the defendant’s estranged wife and subsequently mailed by her to the defendant at his own residence, we hold that personal service pursuant to CPLR 308 has not been effected (see McDonald v. Ames Supply Co., 22 N Y 2d 111). Latham, Acting P. J., Gulotta, Christ, Brennan and Benjamin, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

40 A.D.2d 1009, 339 N.Y.S.2d 126, 1972 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2994, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/chase-v-achtner-nyappdiv-1972.