Summary
In Weidemann v Keith (127 AD2d 831 [2d Dept 1987]), the Court found that a negligence plaintiff, who shared a residence with the defendant, lacked suitable discretion to accept service of process on defendant.
Summary of this case from Bowery Corp. v. EnsleyOpinion
February 23, 1987
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Rockland County (Donovan, J.).
Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, the motion is denied, the cross motion is granted, and the action is dismissed insofar as it is against the appellant.
The plaintiff, who shared a residence with the appellant, was not a person of suitable age and discretion, within the meaning of CPLR 308 (2), to accept service of process on behalf of the appellant. Accordingly, service upon her of the summons with notice along with mail service was not sufficient to confer jurisdiction over the person of the appellant (see, Matter of Community School Dist. No. 13 v. Goodman, 127 A.D.2d 837). Mollen, P.J., Bracken, Lawrence and Sullivan, JJ., concur.