Lama Holding Co. v. Linden
This text of 184 A.D.2d 314 (Lama Holding Co. v. Linden) 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.
Opinion
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Louis Kaplan, J.H.O.), entered September 4, 1991, which after a traverse hearing held that the court did not have in personam jurisdiction over defendant-respondent, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
The record of the traverse hearing supports the conclusion of the Judicial Hearing Officer that plaintiffs failed to exercise due diligence prior to serving defendant pursuant to CPLR 308 (4). Plaintiffs’ process servers attempted personal service on defendant at his New York residence on only two instances during work hours. Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Milonas, Ross, Asch and Kassal, JJ.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
184 A.D.2d 314, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lama-holding-co-v-linden-nyappdiv-1992.