Lara v. 1010 E. Tremont Realty Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Lara v. 1010 E. Tremont Realty Corp.

205 A.D.2d 468, 614 N.Y.S.2d 6

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided June 30, 1994·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Alan Saks, J.), entered November 15, 1993, which granted plaintiff’s motion to dismiss the individual defendants’ affirmative defense of lack of jurisdiction, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

We agree with the IAS Court that the three attempts to serve the individual defendants at their home, the first at 7:25 A.M., the second six days later at 9:09 p.m., and the third the next day at 11:45 A.M., all on weekdays, constituted "due diligence” justifying service under CPLR 308 (4) (see, Hochhauser v Bungeroth, 179 AD2d 431). Concur—Rosenberger, J. P., Ellerin, Ross, Rubin and Nardelli, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Alan Saks, J.), entered November 15, 1993, which granted plaintiff’s motion to dismiss the individual defendants’ affirmative defense of lack of jurisdiction, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

We agree with the IAS Court that the three attempts to serve the individual defendants at their home, the first at 7:25 A.M., the second six days later at 9:09 p.m., and the third the next day at 11:45 A.M., all on weekdays, constituted "due diligence” justifying service under CPLR 308 (4) (see, Hochhauser v Bungeroth, 179 AD2d 431). Concur—Rosenberger, J. P., Ellerin, Ross, Rubin and Nardelli, JJ.

Lara v. 1010 E. Tremont Realty Corp., 205 A.D.2d 468, 614 N.Y.S.2d 6 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

205 A.D.2d 468 (Lara v. 1010 E. Tremont Realty Corp.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related