Raphael v. Gibson
| Decision Date | 02 October 1978 |
| Citation | 65 A.D.2d 553,409 N.Y.S.2d 18 |
| Parties | Diane S. RAPHAEL, Appellant, v. Raymond W. GIBSON et al., Respondents. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
First & First, New York City (Harry First, New York City, of counsel; Gary Philip Asher, New York City, on brief), for appellant.
Diamond, Rutman & Costello, New York City (Stanley H. Kaufman, New York City, of counsel), for respondents.
Before HOPKINS, J. P., and MARTUSCELLO, RABIN and MARGETT, JJ.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, entered March 15, 1978, which (1) granted the defendants' motion to (a) vacate an order of attachment and (b) dismiss the complaint, Inter alia, for lack of quasi-in-rem jurisdiction, and (2) denied the plaintiff's motion to strike the defendants' first affirmative defense of lack of jurisdiction.
Order affirmed, with $50 costs and disbursements.
The plaintiff's failure to serve a summons on the defendants within 60 days of the issuance of the order of attachment renders the order of attachment null and void (see CPLR 6213).
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Buy This, Inc. v. Mci Worldcom Communications, 01 CIV. 8829(NRB).
...N.E. 788, 789 (1896) (grounding this holding in the statutory nature of the attachment remedy); see, e.g., Raphael v. Gibson, 65 A.D.2d 553, 554, 409 N.Y.S.2d 18 (2nd Dep't 1978) (plaintiff's failure to fulfill technical aspect of statute rendered attachment order "null and void"); see gene......
-
Al-Dohan v. Kouyoumjian
...settled that the failure to serve a summons is a jurisdictional defect, fatal to attachment, which voids it ab initio. Raphael v. Gibson, 65 A.D.2d 553, 409 N.Y.S.2d 18; Kieley v. Central Complete Combustion Mfg. Co., 147 N.Y. 620, 42 N.E. 260; Weinstein, Korn & Miller, New York Practice § ......
-
Tomaszewski v. Cleveland, 1
...as to defendant Cleveland solely on plaintiffs' failure to complete service on him as the statute requires (CPLR 6213; Raphael v. Gibson, 65 A.D.2d 553, 409 N.Y.S.2d 18; Galbraith v. Yancik, 77 Misc.2d 130, 353 N.Y.S.2d 134), and as to defendant Martinez on the invalidity of the order of at......
-
Al-Dohan v. Kouyoumjian
...The failure to serve the summons was a jurisdictional defect, which rendered the attachment void ab initio (see Raphael v. Gibson, 65 A.D.2d 553, 409 N.Y.S.2d 18; Galbraith v. Yancik, 77 Misc.2d 130, 353 N.Y.S.2d 134; 7A Weinstein-Korn-Miller, New York Civil Practice p It is also unconteste......