Gold v. Noori

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Gold v. Noori

261 A.D.2d 208, 690 N.Y.S.2d 37, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5274

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

DecidedMay 13, 1999

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 261 A.D.2d 208 (Gold v. Noori) 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

Gold v. Noori, 261 A.D.2d 208, 690 N.Y.S.2d 37, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5274 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Salvador Collazo, J.), entered July 25, 1997, which denied plaintiffs motion to deem the summons and complaint served on defendant Noori by service upon his relative Deborah Noori on January 15,1997 to have been filed as of January 17, 1996, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff concedes that she did not purchase a second index number and did not effect service within 120 days as required by CPLR former 306-b. Contrary to her contentions, the revised version of the statute may not be applied retroactively to this case and the court was without authority to extend the time periods provided in the former statute (see, Reid v Presbyterian Hosp., 254 AD2d 139; Floyd v Salamon Bros., 249 AD2d 139; see also, Connor v Deas, 255 AD2d 287). Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Nardelli, Wallach, Andrias and Saxe, JJ.

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

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Salvador Collazo, J.), entered July 25, 1997, which denied plaintiffs motion to deem the summons and complaint served on defendant Noori by service upon his relative Deborah Noori on January 15,1997 to have been filed as of January 17, 1996, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff concedes that she did not purchase a second index number and did not effect service within 120 days as required by CPLR former 306-b. Contrary to her contentions, the revised version of the statute may not be applied retroactively to this case and the court was without authority to extend the time periods provided in the former statute (see, Reid v Presbyterian Hosp., 254 AD2d 139; Floyd v Salamon Bros., 249 AD2d 139; see also, Connor v Deas, 255 AD2d 287). Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Nardelli, Wallach, Andrias and Saxe, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

261 A.D.2d 208, 690 N.Y.S.2d 37, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5274, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gold-v-noori-nyappdiv-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack