Roussodimou v. Zafiriadis

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Roussodimou v. Zafiriadis

267 A.D.2d 294, 700 N.Y.S.2d 717, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12953

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

DecidedDecember 13, 1999

StatusPublished

This text of 267 A.D.2d 294 (Roussodimou v. Zafiriadis) 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

Roussodimou v. Zafiriadis, 267 A.D.2d 294, 700 N.Y.S.2d 717, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12953 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action to recover damages for dental malpractice, the defendant appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Seidell, J.), dated December 1, 1998, as denied his motion, inter alia, for leave to vacate a judgment of the same court entered August 14, 1995, in favor of the plaintiff and against him, upon his failure to appear or answer.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The defendant’s prior motion to vacate a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, entered August 14, 1995, upon his failure to appear or answer did not raise the contentions that the plaintiff failed to timely file proof of service pursuant to CPLR former 306-b (a), or that the Supreme Court lacked personal jurisdiction over him. Therefore, we agree with the Supreme Court that the defendant waived these contentions (see, Dorfman v Zelik, 240 AD2d 619; see also, Matter of Fry v Village of Tarrytown, 89 NY2d 714; Interlink Metals & Chems. v Kazdan, 222 AD2d 55). S. Miller, J. P., Thompson, Krausman, Florio and Schmidt, JJ., concur.

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

—In an action to recover damages for dental malpractice, the defendant appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Seidell, J.), dated December 1, 1998, as denied his motion, inter alia, for leave to vacate a judgment of the same court entered August 14, 1995, in favor of the plaintiff and against him, upon his failure to appear or answer.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The defendant’s prior motion to vacate a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, entered August 14, 1995, upon his failure to appear or answer did not raise the contentions that the plaintiff failed to timely file proof of service pursuant to CPLR former 306-b (a), or that the Supreme Court lacked personal jurisdiction over him. Therefore, we agree with the Supreme Court that the defendant waived these contentions (see, Dorfman v Zelik, 240 AD2d 619; see also, Matter of Fry v Village of Tarrytown, 89 NY2d 714; Interlink Metals & Chems. v Kazdan, 222 AD2d 55). S. Miller, J. P., Thompson, Krausman, Florio and Schmidt, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

267 A.D.2d 294, 700 N.Y.S.2d 717, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12953, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/roussodimou-v-zafiriadis-nyappdiv-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack