From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Forrester v. Luisa

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jun 12, 2008
52 A.D.3d 324 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008)

Opinion

No. 3925.

June 12, 2008.

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Betty Owen Stinson, J.), entered May 11, 2007, which, after a traverse hearing, granted defendant Obee's motion to dismiss the complaint as against her for lack of personal jurisdiction, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Jonathan Irons, Bronx, for appellant.

McCabe, Collins, McGeough Fowler, LLP, Carle Place (Patrick M. Murphy of counsel), for respondent.

Before: Mazzarelli, J.P., Catterson, Moskowitz and Acosta, JJ.


Plaintiff failed to carry his burden of demonstrating, by a preponderance of the evidence ( see Persaud v Teaneck Nursing Ctr., 290 AD2d 350), that service was properly made upon Obee, a New Jersey resident, in accordance with Vehicle and Traffic Law § 253. Any presumption raised by the affidavit of service that Obee was personally served was overcome by her testimony to the contrary, which was supported in the traverse court's finding of significant discrepancies between her physical characteristics and the description of her in the process server's affidavit of service. The testimony of plaintiff's process server failed to rebut Obee's testimony with "convincing additional details of the facts and circumstances surrounding the alleged service" ( Holtzer v Stepper, 268 AD2d 372).


Summaries of

Forrester v. Luisa

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jun 12, 2008
52 A.D.3d 324 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008)
Case details for

Forrester v. Luisa

Case Details

Full title:ANDREW FORRESTER, Appellant, v. CAROL A. LUISA et al., Defendants, and…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: Jun 12, 2008

Citations

52 A.D.3d 324 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008)
2008 N.Y. Slip Op. 5373
859 N.Y.S.2d 645

Citing Cases

Torres v. Soler

The process server's inability to provide "convincing additional details of the facts and circumstances…

ORIX Fin. Servs., Inc. v. J&S & Sons Transp., Inc.

It is well settled that the plaintiff has the burden of proving, by a preponderance of the credible evidence,…