From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Donley v. Gateway 2000, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 1, 1999
266 A.D.2d 184 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)

Opinion

Submitted September 22, 1999

November 1, 1999

Joseph F. Donley, Rye, N.Y., appellant pro se.

O'Brien Mayr, Rockville Centre, N.Y. (Robert B. Churbuck of counsel), for respondent.

CORNELIUS J. O'BRIEN, J.P., THOMAS R. SULLIVAN, GLORIA GOLDSTEIN, SANDRA J. FEUERSTEIN, JJ.


DECISION ORDER

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for breach of contract, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Colabella, J.), entered February 16, 1999, which denied his motion for leave to enter a judgment upon the defendant's default in appearing, and granted the defendant's cross motion to dismiss the complaint on the ground that service was improper and no jurisdiction was obtained.

ORDERED that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

In support of its cross motion to dismiss the complaint pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(8), the defendant, Gateway 2000, Inc., asserted, inter alia, that service of process pursuant to CPLR 311 (a)(1) was defective because the individual to whom the summons and complaint were delivered was neither its employee nor an agent authorized by appointment or law to accept service on its behalf. The defendant asserted that the individual who was served is an employee of Gateway Country Stores, Inc., a separate corporate entity, and not its agent for the purpose of accepting service of process. No evidence was submitted by the plaintiff tending to show that Gateway Country Stores, Inc., is a wholly-owned subsidiary of the defendant, or is so dominated by the defendant that it acts as a "mere department" of the defendant (see, Delagi v. Volkswagen AG of Wolfsburg, Germany, 29 N.Y.2d 426, 431 ; Public Administrator of County of N.Y. v. Royal Bank of Canada, 19 N.Y.2d 127 ; Taca Int. Airlines, S.A. v. Rolls-Royce of England, 15 N.Y.2d 97, 102 ; Schubert v. Marwell, 218 A.D.2d 693 ; Derso v. Volkswagen of Am., 159 A.D.2d 937 ;Low v. Bayerische Motoren Werke, AG, 88 A.D.2d 504, 506 ). Under these circumstances, the motion was properly denied, and the complaint was properly dismissed.

O'BRIEN, J.P., SULLIVAN, GOLDSTEIN, and FEUERSTEIN, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Donley v. Gateway 2000, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 1, 1999
266 A.D.2d 184 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)
Case details for

Donley v. Gateway 2000, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:JOSEPH F. DONLEY, appellant, v. GATEWAY 2000, Inc., respondent

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

Date published: Nov 1, 1999

Citations

266 A.D.2d 184 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)
697 N.Y.S.2d 326

Citing Cases

Thermwell Prods., Inc. v. Nitto Denko America, Inc.

However, in as much as this issue was raised by the parties in the Friedman Action, and the court anticipates…

SST Foundation v. International Footnotes (HK)

Therefore, service on a parent corporation is not the equivalent of service on the subsidiary. See Donley v.…