Shiuh Chu Lu v. Lalchan

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Shiuh Chu Lu v. Lalchan

5 A.D.3d 240, 773 N.Y.S.2d 286, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2793

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

DecidedMarch 18, 2004

StatusPublished

This text of 5 A.D.3d 240 (Shiuh Chu Lu v. Lalchan) 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

Shiuh Chu Lu v. Lalchan, 5 A.D.3d 240, 773 N.Y.S.2d 286, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2793 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from order, Supreme Court, New York County (Leland DeGrasse, J.), entered August 15, 2002, which denied plaintiffs motion for entry of a default judgment, unanimously dismissed, without costs, as academic.

The order denying plaintiff a default judgment for failure to submit proof of service was rendered academic by a subsequent order granting plaintiff’s motion for an extension of time to serve and file the summons and complaint. If we were to address the propriety of the order, we would affirm, since, as the motion court noted in denying vacatur of said order, service by mail is not sufficient to obtain jurisdiction. Concur—Buckley, P.J., Tom, Sullivan, Ellerin and Williams, JJ.

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

Appeal from order, Supreme Court, New York County (Leland DeGrasse, J.), entered August 15, 2002, which denied plaintiffs motion for entry of a default judgment, unanimously dismissed, without costs, as academic.

The order denying plaintiff a default judgment for failure to submit proof of service was rendered academic by a subsequent order granting plaintiff’s motion for an extension of time to serve and file the summons and complaint. If we were to address the propriety of the order, we would affirm, since, as the motion court noted in denying vacatur of said order, service by mail is not sufficient to obtain jurisdiction. Concur—Buckley, P.J., Tom, Sullivan, Ellerin and Williams, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

5 A.D.3d 240, 773 N.Y.S.2d 286, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2793, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/shiuh-chu-lu-v-lalchan-nyappdiv-2004.