Urena v. Nynex, Inc.
| Decision Date | 23 January 1996 |
| Citation | 637 N.Y.S.2d 49,223 A.D.2d 442 |
| Parties | Secundino URENA, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. NYNEX, INC., et al., Defendants, and E. Laursen Maskingfabrik A/S, Defendant-Respondent. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
B. Schochet, for plaintiff-appellant.
C. Follini, for defendant-respondent.
Before ELLERIN, J.P., and RUBIN, NARDELLI, TOM and MAZZARELLI, JJ.
Order of the Supreme Court, Bronx County (Barry Salman, J.), entered October 11, 1994 which, inter alia, denied plaintiff's cross-motion to dismiss the affirmative defense of lack of personal jurisdiction asserted by defendant E. Laursen Maskingfabrik A/S, unanimously reversed, on the law, and the second affirmative defense of said defendant dismissed, without costs.
Plaintiff's three right middle fingers were amputated after his hand became caught in a cable-cutting machine manufactured by defendant E. Laursen Maskingfabrik A/S ("Laursen"), a Danish Corporation. It is plaintiff's allegation that Laursen negligently manufactured the machine without providing a guard or other safety devices and without providing a warning of its dangers or instructions for its proper installation and operation.
Prior to commencement of the action against Laursen in July 1989, a copy of the summons and complaint apparently came into its possession. Laursen served an answer dated August 13, 1990 in which it did not assert that plaintiff failed to acquire personal jurisdiction under the long-arm statute (CPLR 302[a]. Subsequent to service of the summons and complaint upon it, Laursen served a second answer dated March 26, 1991, in which it did assert both lack of in personam jurisdiction and improper service as affirmative defenses. Laursen then brought a motion to dismiss the complaint against it on these grounds. It alleged a lack of contact with the State of New York, having shipped the machine to defendant J.W. International, a South Carolina corporation, which subsequently sold the device to Nynex for use in this State. Plaintiff submitted a cross motion to strike these affirmative defenses, submitting affidavits of proper service and contending that Laursen had waived any objection to long-arm jurisdiction by its failure to raise the issue in its first answer.
Supreme Court granted plaintiff's cross-motion to the extent of striking Laursen's affirmative defense of improper service, finding that it failed to rebut clear evidence of service in accordance with the Hague Convention. However, the court denied so much of the cross-motion as sought to strike the defense of lack of personal jurisdiction, deeming Laursen's first answer, served before it had properly been served with the complaint, to be a nullity. The Court therefore concluded that Laursen was entitled to raise any and all defenses available to it in response to the properly served summons and complaint.
As this Court has observed, "a defendant who has a defense predicated on a lack of in personam jurisdiction may pursue one of two options: either litigate the issue in the main action or decline to...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Miriam Kaller Family Irrevocable Trust v. Lincoln Benefit Life Co.
...48, 52–54, 547 N.Y.S.2d 18 [1989], lv. dismissed76 N.Y.2d 889, 561 N.Y.S.2d 550, 562 N.E.2d 875 [1990] ; accord Urena v. NYNEX, 223 A.D.2d 442, 443, 637 N.Y.S.2d 49 [1996] ).In specifically addressing decisions rendered by out of state courts, it has been held that:"The full faith and credi......
-
Servs. for the Underserved v. Mohammed
... 2023 NY Slip Op 50536(U) Services for the Underserved, Inc., a/k/a S:US, Petitioner, v. "John" Mohammed, Respondents. L&T Index No. 300364-2020 Civil ... motion, any such defense is waived. (s ee Urena v. NYNEX, ... Inc. , 223 A.D.2d 442, 443, 637 N.Y.S.2d 49 [1st Dept ... 1996] ("An appearance by ... ...
-
Mintz & Gold LLP v. Daibes
...upon it, unless objection to jurisdiction is asserted either in a pre-answer CPLR 3211 motion or in the answer." Urena v. Nynex, Inc., 223 A.D.2d 442, 443 (1st Dep't 1996) (internal quotation marks and citations omitted). "[W]here a defendant makes an appearance without having been served a......
-
Peralta v. City of N.Y.
...of lack of personal jurisdiction ( CPLR 3211[a][8], [e] ), and thus the City waived the defense (see Urena v. NYNEX, Inc., 223 A.D.2d 442, 443–444, 637 N.Y.S.2d 49 [1st Dept. 1996] ; Brown v. Doxsee Sea Clam, Co., 231 A.D.2d 440, 443, 647 N.Y.S.2d 496 [1st Dept. 1996] ). Although the waiver......