Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

113 A.D.2d 964

Hull v. Feinberg

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · decided 1985-09-09

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1985-09-09

How this case has been cited

Cited by 3 later decisions — most recently September 2000

1 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

10198519902000decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1Motion to dismiss appeal granted, without costs.

¶2By notice of appeal dated July 3, 1985, appellants seek to appeal to this court from an order entered May 20, 1985. The present motion to dismiss is based on the contention that the notice of appeal was not timely served and filed.

¶3It appears from an affidavit of service that the order sought to be appealed, together with notice of entry, was served on appellants’ attorney by mail on May 22, 1985. Although the attorney for appellants alleges that the order with notice of entry was not received by him until July 1, 1985, service by mail was complete regardless of delivery to claimant (see, A & B Serv. Sta. v State of New York, 50 AD2d 973, lv denied 39 NY2d 709).

¶4In any event, it appears on the face of the order appealed from, and the fact is admitted, that the motion was not opposed at Special Term. A party may not appeal from an order entered upon his default and the proper remedy is to seek to open the default (Morse v Morse, 67 AD2d 750). Mahoney, P. J., Kane, Main, Levine and Harvey, JJ., concur.

/113/ad2d/964 · .json · Public domain