Legal Opinion

Sapienza v. Haag

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided July 9, 1982No. Appeal No. 1PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Order unanimously reversed, without costs, motion granted, judgment vacated and complaint dismissed. Memorandum: Defendants have moved to vacate a default judgment obtained by plaintiff on the ground that the “nail and mail” alternative for personal service attempted by plaintiff failed to comply with the provisions of CPLR 308 (subd 4). Special Term denied the motion holding that defendants are estopped from raising the jurisdictional challenge because they engaged “in conduct which was and is, calculated to prevent plaintiff from learning of their address.” This was error. As to the issue…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Feinstein v. BergnerNew York Court of Appeals · 1979
  2. Gilbert v. LehmanAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1979

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Schurr v. FillebrownAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1989
  2. 2837 Bailey Corp. v. GouldAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1988
  3. Colagrosso v. DeanAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1984
  4. Citibank v. HarrisAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1999

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API