Bleier v. Heschel
| Decision Date | 16 March 1987 |
| Citation | 512 N.Y.S.2d 902,128 A.D.2d 662 |
| Parties | Robert BLEIER, et al., Appellants, v. Meschulim HESCHEL, et al., Respondents, et al., Defendants. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Benjamin Vinar, Flushing (Marcel Weisman, of counsel), for appellants.
Termini & Epstein, New York City (Herzfeld & Rubin, P.C. of counsel), for defendants.
Before MANGANO, J.P., and BROWN, NIEHOFF and EIBER, JJ.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
In a negligence action recover damages for personal injuries, etc., sustained in an automobile accident, the plaintiffs appeal from so much of a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Morton, J.), dated October 11, 1985, as dismissed the complaint as against the defendants Meschulim Heschel and Syshe M. Heschel.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.
Initially, we note that the plaintiffs sued Meschulim Heschel and Syshe M. Heschel as defendants, when, in fact, Meschulim Heschel and Syshe M. Heschel are the same person.
Robert Bleier, one of the plaintiffs in this action, was a passenger in a car that collided with a car driven by Meschulim Heschel in September 1981. In his answer, Heschel raised the affirmative defense of lack of personal jurisdiction, and a hearing was held in September 1985, prior to the commencement of the trial. According to the process server's affidavit of service, he attempted personal service on Heschel on Tuesday, May 11, 1982, at 2:15 P.M., on Saturday, May 15, 1982, at 5:20 P.M., and on Tuesday, May 18, 1982, at 12:10 P.M. On May 18, 1982, the process server affixed a copy of the summons and complaint to the door of Heschel's residence. He spoke to a neighbor who indicated that Heschel was not in the military service. On May 24, 1982, the process server mailed a copy of the papers to Heschel's residence.
The court ruled that the process server failed to comply with the requirement that service pursuant to CPLR 308(4) be employed only if service under CPLR 308(1) or (2) cannot, with due diligence, be effectuated. We agree. The due diligence requirement of CPLR 308(4) should be strictly observed, given the reduced likelihood that a summons served pursuant to that section will be received (see, Kaszovitz v. Weiszman, 110 A.D.2d 117, 120, 493 N.Y.S.2d 335). Here, two of the attempts at service were made in the early afternoon on weekdays when working individuals cannot reasonably be expected to be home. The affidavit does not indicate that the process server...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
McNeely v. Harrison
...of lack of personal jurisdiction in his answer, he could elect to delay resolution of the issue until trial (see, Bleier v. Heschel, 128 A.D.2d 662, 512 N.Y.S.2d 902; also see, Beris v. Miller, 128 A.D.2d 822, 513 N.Y.S.2d 744). The plaintiff had the option to move to strike the defense at ......
-
Borg v. Feeley
...v.. City of New York, 70 A.D.2d 580 [1979], affd 51 N.Y.2d 906 [1980] ; Matter of McGreevy v. Simon, 220 A.D.2d 713 [1995] ; Bleier v. Heschel, 128 A.D.2d 662 [1987] ; cf. Brown v. Teicher, 188 A.D.2d 256 [1992] ). Under these circumstances, the monetary portion of the default final judgmen......
-
Fulton Sav. Bank v. Rebeor
...19, lv. dismissed 74 N.Y.2d 946, 550 N.Y.S.2d 279, 549 N.E.2d 481; Smith v. Wilson, 130 A.D.2d 821, 515 N.Y.S.2d 146; Bleier v. Heschel, 128 A.D.2d 662, 512 N.Y.S.2d 902). There is no merit to plaintiff's contention that defendant should be estopped from contesting jurisdiction. The record ......
-
Schaevitz v. Radomisli
...in sustaining the nail and mail service upon the defendant (see, Serrano v. Pape, 188 A.D.2d 647, 591 N.Y.S.2d 516; Bleier v. Heschel, 128 A.D.2d 662, 512 N.Y.S.2d 902; Kaszovitz v. Weiszman, 110 A.D.2d 117, 493 N.Y.S.2d THOMPSON, J.P., and SULLIVAN, ALTMAN and GOLDSTEIN, JJ., concur. ...