From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Polansky v. Paugh

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Mar 9, 1965
23 A.D.2d 643 (N.Y. App. Div. 1965)

Summary

In Polansky there was an affidavit showing that the defendant was not available because he had left the address at which service was made "some time ago", whereas in the instant case the only evidence is an unsigned post-office notation that Torres had moved and left no address.

Summary of this case from Brown v. Green Bus Lines

Opinion

March 9, 1965


Order, entered on October 21, 1964, striking out the complete defense of the defendant and Motor Vehicle Accident Indemnification Corporation, unanimously reversed, on the law, with $30 costs and disbursements to appellant, and the motion to strike the same is denied. Where personal service with due diligence cannot be made as provided by CPLR 308 (subd. 1), service can be made under subdivision 3 "by mailing the summons to the person to be served at his last known residence and either affixing the summons to the door of his place of business, dwelling house or usual place of abode within the state". There has been no compliance with the statute since the affidavit of substituted service shows that defendant was not available because he had left the address, 116 Henry Street, Binghamton, New York, "some time ago." Where it appears prior to the attempted substituted service the defendant does not reside at the stated address, due process is not satisfied because there is no reasonable probability of notice to the defendant of the pending action. ( Bauman v. Fisher, 12 A.D.2d 32, 36.)

Concur — Rabin, J.P., Valente, McNally, Stevens and Steuer, JJ.


Summaries of

Polansky v. Paugh

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Mar 9, 1965
23 A.D.2d 643 (N.Y. App. Div. 1965)

In Polansky there was an affidavit showing that the defendant was not available because he had left the address at which service was made "some time ago", whereas in the instant case the only evidence is an unsigned post-office notation that Torres had moved and left no address.

Summary of this case from Brown v. Green Bus Lines

In Polansky v. Paugh (23 A.D.2d 643) the Appellate Division, First Department, held that service made pursuant to CPLR 308 (subd. [3]) by mailing to an address where the plaintiff knew that the defendant did not reside did violate due process.

Summary of this case from Van Dunk v. Lazrovitch
Case details for

Polansky v. Paugh

Case Details

Full title:LONGIN POLANSKY et al., Respondents, v. LEROY PAUGH, Appellant

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

Date published: Mar 9, 1965

Citations

23 A.D.2d 643 (N.Y. App. Div. 1965)

Citing Cases

Wilson v. O'Neal

The court further notes, however, that it has been held that service by "nailing and mailing" at an abode…

Van Dunk v. Lazrovitch

In Polansky v. Paugh ( 23 A.D.2d 643) the Appellate Division, First Department, held that service made…