GNOC Corp. v. Cappelletti

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

GNOC Corp. v. Cappelletti

208 A.D.2d 498, 616 N.Y.S.2d 1018, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9328

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

DecidedOctober 3, 1994

StatusPublished

Cited by9 cases

This text of 208 A.D.2d 498 (GNOC Corp. v. Cappelletti) 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

GNOC Corp. v. Cappelletti, 208 A.D.2d 498, 616 N.Y.S.2d 1018, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9328 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to enforce a New Jersey judgment, entered upon the defendant’s default in appearing, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Putnam County (Dickinson, J.), dated August 19, 1991, which denied its motion for summary judgment.

Ordered that the order is modified, on the law, by adding a provision thereto that, upon searching the record, summary judgment is granted to the defendant dismissing the action; as so modified, the order is affirmed, with costs to the defendant.

Absent a jurisdictional challenge, a final judgment entered upon the defendant’s default in appearing in an action is conclusive and entitled to be given full faith and credit in the courts of this State (see, Fiore v Oakwood Plaza Shopping Ctr., 78 NY2d 572, cert denied — US —, 113 S Ct 75; Steinberg v Metro Entertainment Corp., 145 AD2d 333). However, based upon the record before us, it appears that the plaintiff failed to satisfy the requirements for proper service of process pursuant to rule 4:4-4 of the courts of the State of New Jersey (see, Houie v Allen, 192 NJ Super 517, 471 A2d 429). Thus, the Supreme Court properly found that the judgment in question was not entitled to full faith and credit. Accordingly, we have searched the record and have granted summary judgment to the defendant dismissing the complaint. Bracken, J. P., Sullivan, O’Brien and Joy, JJ., concur.

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

In an action to enforce a New Jersey judgment, entered upon the defendant’s default in appearing, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Putnam County (Dickinson, J.), dated August 19, 1991, which denied its motion for summary judgment.

Ordered that the order is modified, on the law, by adding a provision thereto that, upon searching the record, summary judgment is granted to the defendant dismissing the action; as so modified, the order is affirmed, with costs to the defendant.

Absent a jurisdictional challenge, a final judgment entered upon the defendant’s default in appearing in an action is conclusive and entitled to be given full faith and credit in the courts of this State (see, Fiore v Oakwood Plaza Shopping Ctr., 78 NY2d 572, cert denied — US —, 113 S Ct 75; Steinberg v Metro Entertainment Corp., 145 AD2d 333). However, based upon the record before us, it appears that the plaintiff failed to satisfy the requirements for proper service of process pursuant to rule 4:4-4 of the courts of the State of New Jersey (see, Houie v Allen, 192 NJ Super 517, 471 A2d 429). Thus, the Supreme Court properly found that the judgment in question was not entitled to full faith and credit. Accordingly, we have searched the record and have granted summary judgment to the defendant dismissing the complaint. Bracken, J. P., Sullivan, O’Brien and Joy, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

208 A.D.2d 498, 616 N.Y.S.2d 1018, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9328, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gnoc-corp-v-cappelletti-nyappdiv-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack