Reed v. Gowanda Nursing Home

New York Court of Appeals

Reed v. Gowanda Nursing Home

825 N.E.2d 584, 4 N.Y.3d 770, 792 N.Y.S.2d 369, 2005 N.Y. LEXIS 106

CourtNew York Court of Appeals

DecidedFebruary 10, 2005

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 825 N.E.2d 584 (Reed v. Gowanda Nursing Home) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Reed v. Gowanda Nursing Home, 825 N.E.2d 584, 4 N.Y.3d 770, 792 N.Y.S.2d 369, 2005 N.Y. LEXIS 106 (N.Y. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs, and the certified question answered in the affirmative.

Business Corporation Law § 307 (c) (2) requires a party who has served papers by mail on an out-of-state defendant to file proof of service within 30 days after “receipt of the return receipt signed by the foreign corporation, or other official proof of delivery or of the original envelope mailed.” We are asked to decide whether an affidavit of compliance annexing a copy of the papers served—date and time stamped “Received” by out-of-state defendant U-Haul International, Inc.—is sufficient under the statute. In this case, there can be no doubt that plaintiff provided proof that defendant received the mailing shortly after it was sent by registered mail, return receipt requested, and that plaintiffs received no return receipt. Under the particular circumstances presented here, we agree with the motion court and Appellate Division that the complaint should not be dismissed for want of proper service on defendant U-Haul.

Chief Judge Kaye and Judges G.B. Smith, Ciparick, Rosenblatt, Graffeo, Read and R.S. Smith concur in memorandum.

Order affirmed, etc.

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

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs, and the certified question answered in the affirmative.

Business Corporation Law § 307 (c) (2) requires a party who has served papers by mail on an out-of-state defendant to file proof of service within 30 days after “receipt of the return receipt signed by the foreign corporation, or other official proof of delivery or of the original envelope mailed.” We are asked to decide whether an affidavit of compliance annexing a copy of the papers served—date and time stamped “Received” by out-of-state defendant U-Haul International, Inc.—is sufficient under the statute. In this case, there can be no doubt that plaintiff provided proof that defendant received the mailing shortly after it was sent by registered mail, return receipt requested, and that plaintiffs received no return receipt. Under the particular circumstances presented here, we agree with the motion court and Appellate Division that the complaint should not be dismissed for want of proper service on defendant U-Haul.

Chief Judge Kaye and Judges G.B. Smith, Ciparick, Rosenblatt, Graffeo, Read and R.S. Smith concur in memorandum.

Order affirmed, etc.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

825 N.E.2d 584, 4 N.Y.3d 770, 792 N.Y.S.2d 369, 2005 N.Y. LEXIS 106, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/reed-v-gowanda-nursing-home-ny-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack