Key Bank USA v. Klein

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Key Bank USA v. Klein

243 A.D.2d 688, 664 N.Y.S.2d 569, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10701

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

DecidedOctober 27, 1997

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 243 A.D.2d 688 (Key Bank USA v. Klein) 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

Key Bank USA v. Klein, 243 A.D.2d 688, 664 N.Y.S.2d 569, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10701 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to foreclose a mortgage, the defendant Moshe Klein appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Rockland County (Meehan, J.), entered March 18, 1996, which denied his motion, inter alia, to vacate a judgment of foreclosure made upon his default in appearing.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The Supreme Court’s determination that the testimony of the process server was credible is entitled to substantial deference on appeal (Federal Natl. Mtge. Assn. v Roth, 240 AD2d 466; Citibank, N. A. v Baronat, 238 AD2d 369; McCray v Petrini, 212 AD2d 676). Based on that testimony the Supreme Court properly determined that personal jurisdiction was obtained over the appellant pursuant to CPLR 308 (2). Mangano, P. J., Rosenblatt, Pizzuto and Luciano, JJ., concur.

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

In an action to foreclose a mortgage, the defendant Moshe Klein appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Rockland County (Meehan, J.), entered March 18, 1996, which denied his motion, inter alia, to vacate a judgment of foreclosure made upon his default in appearing.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The Supreme Court’s determination that the testimony of the process server was credible is entitled to substantial deference on appeal (Federal Natl. Mtge. Assn. v Roth, 240 AD2d 466; Citibank, N. A. v Baronat, 238 AD2d 369; McCray v Petrini, 212 AD2d 676). Based on that testimony the Supreme Court properly determined that personal jurisdiction was obtained over the appellant pursuant to CPLR 308 (2). Mangano, P. J., Rosenblatt, Pizzuto and Luciano, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

243 A.D.2d 688, 664 N.Y.S.2d 569, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10701, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/key-bank-usa-v-klein-nyappdiv-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack