Legal Opinion

O'Hara & Crough v. Greenstein

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

Decided March 17, 1995Published

1Opinion of the Court

—Order unanimously modified on the law and as modified affirmed without costs in accordance with the following Memorandum: Supreme Court erred in dismissing the complaint based on lack of personal jurisdiction. The court determined that "nail and mail” service pursuant to CPLR 308 (4) was improper because the attempts by plaintiff’s process server to serve defendant personally did not constitute "due diligence.” The court found, after a traverse hearing, that the process server attempted personal service at defendant’s residence on four separate dates at various times of day; those attempts…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Hochhauser v. BungerothAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1992
  2. Pizzolo v. MonacoAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1992
  3. Matos v. KnibbsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1992
  4. Vail v. CatalanoAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1990

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

Powered by the Exa API