Citibank, N. A. v. Stefansky
Opinion of the Court
—In an action to foreclose a mortgage upon real property, the defendants Erica Winzelberg, Martin Ungar, and Suzy Menczer appeal (1), as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Barasch, J.), dated February 18, 1997, as (a) granted the plaintiffs motion to serve the defendants Milly Stefansky, Eli Stefansky, and Martin Ungar by publication, and (b) denied
Ordered that the appeal from so much of the order dated February 18, 1997, as granted the plaintiffs motion to serve the defendants Milly Stefansky and Eli Stefansky by publication is dismissed, without costs or disbursements, as the appellants are not aggrieved thereby; and it is further,
Ordered that the appeal by Martin Ungar from so much of the order dated February 18, 1997, as denied the cross motion of the defendants Erica Winzelberg and Suzy Menczer is dismissed, without costs or disbursements, as he is not aggrieved thereby; and it is further,
Ordered that the order dated February 18, 1997, is affirmed insofar as reviewed, without costs or disbursements, and it is further,
Ordered that the order dated June 5, 1997, is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
Contrary to the appellants’ contention, the court properly granted the plaintiff leave to serve Martin Ungar by publication inasmuch as the plaintiff sufficiently demonstrated that service could not be made by another prescribed method with due diligence (see, CPLR 315).
The appellants’ remaining contentions are without merit. O’Brien, J. P., Pizzuto, Joy and Goldstein, JJ., concur.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.