Majority
Although the 120-day period to serve the defendant pursuant to CPLR 306-b expired on February 22, 2010, the plaintiff made no attempt to serve the defendant during that period. On March 16, 2010, the plaintiff served a copy of the summons with notice upon the defendant through the Secretary of State.
Thereafter, the defendant moved to dismiss the complaint pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (8) on the ground of lack of personal jurisdiction. In her opposition papers, the plaintiff argued that, in the interest of justice, she should be given additional time to serve her summons with notice.
In the order appealed from, the Supreme Court granted the defendant’s motion. We affirm the order insofar as appealed from.
The Supreme Court properly granted the defendant’s motion given the plaintiffs failure to effect service upon it (see CPLR 306-b; Leader v Maroney, Ponzini & Spencer, 97 NY2d 95 , 105-106 [2001]). Contrary to the plaintiffs contention, she was
The plaintiffs remaining contention is without merit. Rivera, J.P, Balkin, Eng and Austin, JJ., concur.
Cases cited
- Leader v. Maroney, Ponzini & Spencer 97 NY2d 95 at 105-106 p. 1000
- DeLorenzo v. Gabbino Pizza Corp. 83 AD3d 992 at 993 p. 1001
- Rinaldi v. Rochford 77 AD3d 720 at 720 p. 1001
- New York State Division of Human Rights v. Oceanside Cove II Apartment Corp. 39 AD3d 608 at 609 p. 1001
- Broser v. Dworman 78 AD3d 979 at 980 p. 1001
- Khodeeva v. Chi Chung Yip 84 AD3d 1030 at 1031 p. 1001
- Calloway v. Wells 79 AD3d 786 at 787 p. 1001
- Varon v. Mainmonides Medical Center 67 AD3d 779 at 779 p. 1001
- Meusa v. BMW Financial Services 32 AD3d 830 at 831 p. 1001