Opinion
Submitted October 20, 1999
December 6, 1999
In a mortgage foreclosure action, the defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (LeVine, J.), dated February 6, 1998, which, after a hearing to determine whether service of process had been properly made upon her, denied her motion, in effect, to vacate a judgment of foreclosure and sale dated October 21, 1996, entered upon her default in answering the complaint.
Abraham Hecht, Forest Hills, N.Y., for appellant.
Cullen and Dykman, Garden City, N.Y. (Ruth O'Connor of counsel), for respondent.
CORNELIUS J. O'BRIEN, J.P., THOMAS R. SULLIVAN, GLORIA GOLDSTEIN, SANDRA J. FEUERSTEIN, JJ.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.
The hearing court was presented with a credibility question as to whether the appellant was properly served with process in accordance with the requirements of CPLR 308(2). The court determined that question in favor of the plaintiff and concluded that proper service had been affectuated.
It is well settled that the determination of the trier of fact at a hearing is entitled to deference on appeal ( see, Avakian v. De Los Santos, 183 A.D.2d 687; Nagib v. Tolette-Velcek, 133 A.D.2d 72) and will not be disturbed unless it is against the weight of the credible evidence ( see, Evering v. Bronx Chrysler Plymouth, 234 A.D.2d 586; McCray v. Petrini, 212 A.D.2d 676). On this record, we find no basis to disturb the hearing court's determination.
O'BRIEN, J.P., SULLIVAN, GOLDSTEIN, and FEUERSTEIN, JJ., CONCUR.