On May 13, 2019, Justice Borrok of the New York County Commercial Division issued a decision in Furuya v. Parry, 2019 NY Slip Op. 31354(U), excusing the late filing of an affidavit of service, explaining: CPLR 306-b provides that a plaintiff must serve the summons and complaint within 120 days after commencement of an action. An... Read more »
Blogs
Posts Categorized: Service of Process
Party Asserting Lack of Service as an Affirmative Defense Must Move for Judgment on that Defense Within 60 Days of Answering
On May 8, 2019, the Second Department issued a decision in U.S. Bank N.A. v. Roque, 2019 NY Slip Op. 03648, holding that a party asserting lack of service as an affirmative defense must move for judgment on that defense within 60 days of answering, explaining: An objection that the summons and complaint was not properly... Read more »
Action Dismissed For Failure Timely to Serve Summons and Complaint
On February 7, 2019, Justice Platkin of the Albany County Commercial Division issued a decision in Plank, LLC v. Dutch Vil., LLC, 2019 NY Slip Op. 50188(U), dismissing an action for failure timely to serve the summons and complaint, explaining: CPLR 306-b requires service of process to be made within 120 days of the filing of... Read more »
Failure to Serve Order to Show Cause as Directed Jurisdictional Defect
On January 23, 2019, the Second Department issued a decision in Boucan NYC Café, LLC v. 467 Rogers, LLC, 2019 NY Slip Op. 00416, holding that the failure to serve an order to show cause was a jurisdictional defect, explaining: We agree with the defendant’s contention that the service requirements set forth in the order to... Read more »
Court Grants Extension of Time To Serve Defendant Even Though Plaintiff Did Not Provide Good Cause for Failure Timely to Serve
On November 5, 2018, Justice Livote of the Queens County Commercial Division issued a decision in FCS Group, LLC v. Chica, 2018 NY Slip Op. 33433(U), extending a plaintiff’s time to serve even though the plaintiff did not show good cause for failing timely to serve, explaining: CPLR 32ll(a)(8) provides that a party may move the... Read more »
Action Dismissed for Failure Timely to Serve Defendants
On December 17, 2018, Justice Bransten of the New York County Commercial Division issued a decision in Juma Tech. Corp. v. Servidio, 2018 NY Slip Op. 33347(U), dismissing an action for failure timely to serve the defendants, explaining: CPLR 306-b also states, in relevant part, that service of the summons and complaint shall be made... Read more »
Failure Strictly to Comply With Service Requirements of LLC Law 304 Makes Service Ineffective
On December 22, 2017, the Fourth Department decided in Chan v. Onyx Capital, LLC, 2017 NY Slip Op. 08966, holding the failure strictly to comply with the service requirements of LLC Law Section 204 makes service ineffective, explaining: We agree with SRP that plaintiff failed to comply strictly with Limited Liability Company Law § 304... Read more »
No Jurisdiction Over Defendants If Proper Service Under the CPLR Is Not Made, Even if Defendants Received the Documents
On November 29, 2017, the Second Department issued a decision in Josephs v. AACT Fast Collections Services, Inc., 2017 NY Slip Op. 08357, holding that if defendants were not properly served, the court had no jurisdiction over them regardless of whether they received the Summons and Complaint, explaining: The affidavits of service filed by the... Read more »
Action Dismissed for Failure Timely to Serve Complaint
On October 10, 2017, the First Department issued a decision in Goldstein Group Holding, Inc. v. 310 E. 4th St. Housing Development Fund Corp., 2017 NY Slip Op. 07086, holding that an action properly was dismissed for failure timely to serve the complaint on the defendant, explaining: Supreme Court correctly dismissed the complaint for lack... Read more »
Motion Extending Time to Serve Made 18 Months After Service Was Contested Not Improperly Granted
On April 20, 2017, the First Department issued a decision in Deutsche Bank, AG v. Vik, 2017 NY Slip Op. 03075, holding that a trial court did not abuse its discretion in granting a motion to extend time to serve made 18 months after service was contested, explaining: The motion court exercised its discretion in... Read more »