Miller v. Bank of New York

and votes to reverse the order appealed from, with the following memorandum: If this case involved no more than a question of service by an attorney who is a party to the action, I would vote to affirm the dismissal of the complaint under constraint of the cases relied upon by the majority (but see, Matter of Schodack Concerned Citizens v Town Bd., 148 AD2d 130; American Home Assur. Co. v Morris Indus. Bldrs., 176 AD2d 541). Here, however, the plaintiffs’ attorney served an attorney of the Bank of New York. That attorney signed an acknowledgment of service which stated: "This will acknowledge…