Queens Examination Center, Inc. v. Ajax One Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Queens Examination Center, Inc. v. Ajax One Co.

42 A.D.2d 554, 345 N.Y.S.2d 61, 1973 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4001

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

DecidedJune 28, 1973

StatusPublished

This text of 42 A.D.2d 554 (Queens Examination Center, Inc. v. Ajax One Co.) 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

Queens Examination Center, Inc. v. Ajax One Co., 42 A.D.2d 554, 345 N.Y.S.2d 61, 1973 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4001 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1973).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County, entered on April 26, 1973, denying defendant-appellant’s motion to dismiss this action for failure to serve a complaint and to discharge the mechanic’s lien filed by plaintiff, unanimously modified, on the law and the facts, to the extent of granting the motion to dismiss unless a complaint is served within 10 days after service upon plaintiffs-respondents by defendant-appellant of a copy of the order entered herein, with notice of entry, and otherwise affirmed, without costs and without disbursements. Service of a summons on appellant’s counsel was valid service, since same was accepted by counsel, who, in turn, served a notice of appearance on behalf of appellant. While the notice of appearance was apparently not objected to or rejected, the record discloses a possible misunderstanding between the parties as to the nature and/or scope of the appearance. Under the circumstances plaintiffs should be given one final opportunity to perfect their action by service of a complaint. Concur — Stevens, P. J., Kupferman, Steuer and Capozzoli, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County, entered on April 26, 1973, denying defendant-appellant’s motion to dismiss this action for failure to serve a complaint and to discharge the mechanic’s lien filed by plaintiff, unanimously modified, on the law and the facts, to the extent of granting the motion to dismiss unless a complaint is served within 10 days after service upon plaintiffs-respondents by defendant-appellant of a copy of the order entered herein, with notice of entry, and otherwise affirmed, without costs and without disbursements. Service of a summons on appellant’s counsel was valid service, since same was accepted by counsel, who, in turn, served a notice of appearance on behalf of appellant. While the notice of appearance was apparently not objected to or rejected, the record discloses a possible misunderstanding between the parties as to the nature and/or scope of the appearance. Under the circumstances plaintiffs should be given one final opportunity to perfect their action by service of a complaint. Concur — Stevens, P. J., Kupferman, Steuer and Capozzoli, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

42 A.D.2d 554, 345 N.Y.S.2d 61, 1973 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4001, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/queens-examination-center-inc-v-ajax-one-co-nyappdiv-1973.