From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Napic, N.V. v. Fverfa Investments, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 25, 1993
193 A.D.2d 549 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)

Opinion

May 25, 1993

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Joan B. Lobis, J.).


In this action by a condominium unit owner against another unit owner to recover for water damages, jurisdiction over defendant, a corporation, was not acquired by delivering a copy of the process to the concierge of the building and mailing another copy to defendant's unit (see, Lakeside Concrete Corp. v Pine Hollow Bldg. Corp., 104 A.D.2d 551, affd 65 N.Y.2d 865). Nor can plaintiff's noncompliance with the service requirements of CPLR 311 be excused on the ground that its process server had exercised due diligence after being denied access to defendant's unit by the concierge. Austrian Lance Stewart v Rockefeller Ctr. ( 163 A.D.2d 125), relied on by plaintiff, is distinguishable in various respects, including the absence of any allegation, much less proof, that anyone acting under defendant's control or with its knowledge assisted defendant in evading service. We have considered plaintiff's other arguments and find them to be without merit.

Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Ross, Kassal and Nardelli, JJ.


Summaries of

Napic, N.V. v. Fverfa Investments, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 25, 1993
193 A.D.2d 549 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)
Case details for

Napic, N.V. v. Fverfa Investments, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:NAPIC, N.V., Appellant, v. FVERFA INVESTMENTS, INC., Respondent

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

Date published: May 25, 1993

Citations

193 A.D.2d 549 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)
597 N.Y.S.2d 707

Citing Cases

Y&B Lighting & Elec. Supplies, Inc. v. JYC Elec. Contracting Inc.

Pursuant to CPLR §311, personal service upon a corporation is made by delivering the summons and complaint…

Nicodene v. Byblos Rest., Inc.

Plaintiff has made no showing that service was made or attempted upon the corporate defendant Byblos…