Rowlan v. Brooklyn Jewish Hosp.
| Decision Date | 02 April 1984 |
| Citation | 474 N.Y.S.2d 84,100 A.D.2d 844 |
| Parties | Carolyn ROWLAN, et al., Appellants, v. BROOKLYN JEWISH HOSPITAL, et al., Defendants, Henry Moskowitz, Respondent. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Gordon, Weinstein & Grossman, New York City (Murray A. Gordon, New York City, of counsel), for appellants.
Martin, Clearwater & Bell, New York City (Andrew S. Garson, New York City, of counsel), for respondent.
Before TITONE, J.P., and RUBIN, BOYERS and EIBER, JJ.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
In a medical malpractice action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated January 13, 1983, which, after a hearing, denied their motion to strike defendant Moskowitz's affirmative defense of lack of personal jurisdiction and granted said defendant's cross motion to dismiss the complaint as against him.
Order reversed, on the law and the facts, with costs, motion granted, the affirmative defense of lack of personal jurisdiction is stricken from the answer of defendant Moskowitz, and cross motion denied.
We conclude that plaintiffs introduced sufficient evidence at the traverse hearing to sustain their burden of proving that process was properly served upon defendant Moskowitz (see Old Colony Furniture Co. v. Fiegoli, 97 A.D.2d 790, 468 N.Y.S.2d 416; Smid v. Lombard, 83 A.D.2d 877, 442 N.Y.S.2d 104; cf. DeZego v. Bruhn, A.D., 472 N.Y.S.2d 414). Plaintiffs' process server, who refreshed his recollection with reliable contemporaneous records, unequivocally testified that he had personally effected service at the time and place in question.
The inconsistencies between the physical description of defendant Moskowitz as stated in the affidavit of service and as he appeared in court are not significant. The conflicting testimony as to whether Moskowitz, in fact, changed his physical appearance and the possibility that he may have darkened his prematurely gray hair must be viewed in light of the other evidence. Specifically, Moskowitz did not substantiate his testimony with his office diary, or by the testimony of a codefendant who was served at the same time and location and who did not dispute such service, or by his secretary whom Moskowitz claimed had accepted the process (cf. Noce v. Kaufman, 2 N.Y.2d 347, 353, 161 N.Y.S.2d 1, 141 N.E.2d 529; Gill v. Anderson, 39 A.D.2d 941, 333 N.Y.S.2d 49). Conversely, the process server, a legally disinterested party,...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Lefton v. Freedman
...is not warranted under the circumstances. We note that Dennis Cook was a "legally disinterested" witness (Rowlan v. Brooklyn Jewish Hosp., 100 A.D.2d 844, 845, 474 N.Y.S.2d 84), whereas Mrs. Freedman was the wife of the defendant, a party to the litigation. Further, the failure of Cook's fo......
-
Rotanelli v. Westchester Cnty. Bd. of Elections
...delivery.” The petitioners bore the burden to establish this fact at the traverse hearing ( see Rowlan v. Brooklyn Jewish Hospital, 100 A.D.2d 844, 474 N.Y.S.2d 84 [2d Dept. 1984] ). Here, the Court is satisfied that by utilizing “Express Mail,” the petitioners utilized an overnight deliver......
-
Quantum Heating Services Inc. v. Austern
... ... Doctors Hosp. of Staten Is., 66 A.D.2d 792, 410 N.Y.S.2d 903; cf. Watt v. New York ... ...
-
Prosolov v. PSRS Realty
...service and the individual defendant's appearance in court almost 1 ½ years later were not significant (see Rowlan v. Brooklyn Jewish Hosp., 100 A.D.2d 844, 845, 474 N.Y.S.2d 84 ; cf. Skyline Agency v. Coppotelli, Inc., 117 A.D.2d 135, 139, 502 N.Y.S.2d 479 ). The hearing court's determinat......