Psyllos v. Psyllos

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Psyllos v. Psyllos

21 A.D.3d 560, 799 N.Y.S.2d 903, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8710

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

DecidedAugust 22, 2005

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 21 A.D.3d 560 (Psyllos v. Psyllos) 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

Psyllos v. Psyllos, 21 A.D.3d 560, 799 N.Y.S.2d 903, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8710 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

In a child custody proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 6, the mother appeals from an order of the Family Court, Suffolk County (Lynaugh, J.), entered January 10, 2005, which denied, without a hearing, her motion (1) to vacate an order of the same court entered November 30, 2004, granting the father’s petition for custody of the subject children, upon her default, and (2) to dismiss the petition for lack of personal jurisdiction.

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, the motion is granted, the order entered November 30, 2004, is vacated, and the proceeding is dismissed.

The record supports the mother’s contention that she was not properly served with the petition. The father was directed to serve the petition personally upon the mother. The father’s proof of service consisted only of a United Parcel Service tracking document. Since personal jurisdiction was not obtained, the Family Court erred in denying the mother’s motion (see Laurenzano v Laurenzano, 222 AD2d 560 [1995]; Community State Bank v Haakonson, 94 AD2d 838 [1983]). Schmidt, J.P., S. Miller, Mastro and Rivera, JJ., concur.

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

In a child custody proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 6, the mother appeals from an order of the Family Court, Suffolk County (Lynaugh, J.), entered January 10, 2005, which denied, without a hearing, her motion (1) to vacate an order of the same court entered November 30, 2004, granting the father’s petition for custody of the subject children, upon her default, and (2) to dismiss the petition for lack of personal jurisdiction.

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, the motion is granted, the order entered November 30, 2004, is vacated, and the proceeding is dismissed.

The record supports the mother’s contention that she was not properly served with the petition. The father was directed to serve the petition personally upon the mother. The father’s proof of service consisted only of a United Parcel Service tracking document. Since personal jurisdiction was not obtained, the Family Court erred in denying the mother’s motion (see Laurenzano v Laurenzano, 222 AD2d 560 [1995]; Community State Bank v Haakonson, 94 AD2d 838 [1983]). Schmidt, J.P., S. Miller, Mastro and Rivera, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

21 A.D.3d 560, 799 N.Y.S.2d 903, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8710, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/psyllos-v-psyllos-nyappdiv-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack