Glikman v. Horowitz

• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
• Writing for the Court: Before HOPKINS
• Citation: Glikman v. Horowitz, 411 N.Y.S.2d 365, 66 A.D.2d 814 (N.Y. App. Div. 1978)
• Decision Date: 18 December 1978
• Parties: Esther GLIKMAN et al., Appellants, v. Albert HOROWITZ, Respondent.

Page 365

411 N.Y.S.2d 365

66 A.D.2d 814

Esther GLIKMAN et al., Appellants, v. Albert HOROWITZ, Respondent.

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.

Dec. 18, 1978.

Segan, Culhane, Nemerov & Green, P. C., New York City (Geraldine Gould, New York City, of counsel), for appellants.

Martin, Clearwater & Bell, New York City (Marsha Birnbaum, New York City, of counsel), for respondent.

Before HOPKINS, J. P., and DAMIANI, GULOTTA and HAWKINS, JJ.

MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.

In a medical malpractice action, the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated October 7, 1977, which denied their motion to dismiss the first defense of defendant's answer, i. e., that the plaintiffs failed to obtain personal jurisdiction over the defendant because of improper service of process, and sustained the said defense.

Order affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The sole issue raised on appeal is whether the plaintiffs obtained personal jurisdiction over the defendant pursuant to CPLR 308 (subd. 2), i. e., by service of process upon a person of "suitable age and discretion" at the defendant's actual business address, plus mailing a second copy of the summons and complaint to the defendant's last known Residence. It is undisputed that the process server mailed the second copy of the process to the defendant's Business address, which address was plainly listed in the telephone directory as an "office". Process was never mailed...