From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of G.H. Miner v. Lone Wolf Insulation

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Sep 29, 1995
219 A.D.2d 831 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)

Opinion

September 29, 1995

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Onondaga County, Stone, J.

Present — Denman, P.J., Lawton, Fallon, Balio and Boehm, JJ.


Order unanimously affirmed with costs. Memorandum: Petitioner, the judgment creditor in an underlying action, commenced this "turnover" special proceeding pursuant to CPLR 5225 (b) to enforce the judgment in that action out of money due to the judgment debtor from a third party, respondent ABL Plumbing Heating Corp. (ABL). ABL appeals from an order denying its motion to dismiss the proceeding for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, based upon petitioner's failure to obtain a new index number prior to commencing the special proceeding. Supreme Court denied ABL's motion on the ground, inter alia, that the requirements of CPLR article 3 were satisfied when the court clerk accepted the order to show cause and petition for filing under the index number pertaining to the underlying action. The court properly denied the motion to dismiss. Under the new "commencement by filing" system, a litigant must purchase an index number before filing the summons and complaint in an action, or before filing the notice of petition and petition in a special proceeding, and must place that index number on the papers before serving them on the defendant (see, CPLR 105 [b]; 304, 305 [a]; 306-a [a]). Thus, a new index number was required for commencement of this special proceeding pursuant to CPLR 5225 (b), and that requirement was not satisfied by petitioner's use of the index number pertaining to the underlying action. Nevertheless, ABL was not entitled to an order of dismissal as a result of petitioner's use of the old number. The failure to obtain an index number is a correctable, non-jurisdictional defect (see, CPLR 306-a [b]; cf., Cellular Tel. Co. v Village of Tarrytown, 209 A.D.2d 57, 64). Here, petitioner timely rectified the defect by purchasing a new index number during the pendency of ABL's motion. In any event, ABL was not entitled to dismissal without complying with the procedure outlined in CPLR 306-a (b).


Summaries of

Matter of G.H. Miner v. Lone Wolf Insulation

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Sep 29, 1995
219 A.D.2d 831 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
Case details for

Matter of G.H. Miner v. Lone Wolf Insulation

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of G.H. MINER CO., INC., Respondent, v. LONE WOLF…

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

Date published: Sep 29, 1995

Citations

219 A.D.2d 831 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
632 N.Y.S.2d 372

Citing Cases

Venditti v. Town of Alden

On February 18, 1993, plaintiffs filed a summons and complaint in this action under the index number obtained…

Poley Paving v. United Cerebral Palsy Assn

Where the subsequent proceeding is an adjunct of the original proceeding, we continue with the adoption of a…