Arc Plumbing & Heating Corp. v. Pullman
Opinion of the Court
— In an action, inter alia, to recover the value of materials and labor supplied to defendant by plaintiff, defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Leviss, J.), dated February 7, 1984, which, after a traverse hearing, denied his motion to dismiss plaintiff’s complaint on the ground of lack of personal jurisdiction and granted plaintiff’s cross motion to dismiss this affirmative defense.
Order affirmed, with costs.
After four subsequent and similarly unsuccessful attempts, the witness returned the papers to the Sheriff’s office and requested substituted service. That office then contacted plaintiff’s attorney and ascertained that it should proceed with substituted service. On July 11, 1978, Euvino affixed a copy of the summons and complaint to defendant’s door. A copy of each document was mailed to defendant six days later.
In his affidavit in support of a motion to dismiss the complaint for lack of personal jurisdiction, defendant did not deny that he had received the summons and complaint in the mail nor did he deny that a copy of each had been affixed to his door. Under these circumstances, we agree with the finding of Special Term that service was proper. Thompson, J. P., Weinstein, Rubin and Lawrence, JJ., concur.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.