Bulkan v. Stepp's Towing Serv., Inc.
| Citation | 166 A.D.3d 576,84 N.Y.S.3d 904 (Mem) |
| Decision Date | 07 November 2018 |
| Docket Number | 2017–00090,Index No. 14649/15 |
| Parties | Jewel BULKAN, Respondent, v. STEPP'S TOWING SERVICE, INC., et al., Appellants. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court Appellate Division |
166 A.D.3d 576
84 N.Y.S.3d 904 (Mem)
Jewel BULKAN, Respondent,
v.
STEPP'S TOWING SERVICE, INC., et al., Appellants.
2017–00090
Index No. 14649/15
Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Argued—October 2, 2018
November 7, 2018
Gerber, Ciano, Kelly & Brady, Garden City, N.Y. (William G. Kelly and Michael Harris of counsel), for appellants.
JOHN M. LEVENTHAL, J.P., CHERYL E. CHAMBERS, SANDRA L. SGROI, FRANCESCA E. CONNOLLY, JJ.
DECISION & ORDER
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries and injury to property, the defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Frederick D.R. Sampson, J.), dated September 30, 2016. The order, insofar as appealed from, denied that branch of the defendants' motion which was pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(8) to dismiss the complaint insofar as asserted against the defendant Stepp's Towing Service, Inc., on the ground of lack of personal jurisdiction.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.
The defendant Stepp's Towing Service, Inc. (hereinafter Stepp's Towing), served its answer to the complaint on April 26, 2016, asserting, inter alia, an affirmative defense based on lack of proper service. Pursuant to CPLR 3211(e), Stepp's Towing was required to move for judgment on
that ground within 60 days after service of its answer, unless undue hardship prevented it from making the motion within that time (see Zucco v. Antin, 257 A.D.2d 421, 422, 682 N.Y.S.2d 354 ; see also Federici v. Metropolis Night Club, Inc., 48 A.D.3d 741, 742, 853 N.Y.S.2d 160 ). The 60–day period was not restarted upon Stepp's Towing's service of an amended answer on June 17, 2016 (see Zucco v. Antin, 257 A.D.2d at 422, 682 N.Y.S.2d 354 ).
Here, Stepp's Towing did not move to dismiss the complaint insofar as asserted against it for lack of personal jurisdiction until August 10, 2016—well after the 60–day period had lapsed (see CPLR 3211[e] ; Zucco v. Antin, 257 A.D.2d at 422, 682 N.Y.S.2d 354 ;...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Rucigay v. Wyckoff Heights Med. Ctr.
...is unpreserved for appellate review, as the plaintiffs failed to timely object to the challenged ruling (see Aronov v. Kanarek, 166 A.D.3d at 576, 88 N.Y.S.3d 73 ).194 A.D.3d 868 The plaintiffs argue that the jury verdict in favor of the defendant physicians was contrary to the weight of th......
-
U.S. Bank Nat'l Ass'n v. Donovan
...Acevedo, 157 A.D.3d at 861, 69 N.Y.S.3d 693 ; Dimond v. Verdon, 5 A.D.3d at 719, 773 N.Y.S.2d 603 ; see also Bulkan v. Stepp's Towing Serv., Inc., 166 A.D.3d 576, 84 N.Y.S.3d 904 ). Accordingly, we agree with the Supreme Court's determination to deny the defendant's motion to vacate the ord......
-
Amer v. City of N.Y.
...actually notified exist at a specified location" ( Katz v. City of New York, 87 N.Y.2d 241, 243, 638 N.Y.S.2d 593, 661 N.E.2d 1374 ; see84 N.Y.S.3d 904 Puzhayeva v. City of New York, 151 A.D.3d 988, 990, 58 N.Y.S.3d 92 ; Gellman v. Cooke, 148 A.D.3d 1117, 1118, 51 N.Y.S.3d 549 ; Williams v.......