The jurisdictional affirmative defense contained in defendant Padula's answer was premised upon plaintiffs' failure to comply with CPLR article 3 "relative to the filing of the summons, verified complaint and proof of service." His motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction, on the other hand, asserted that personal jurisdiction had not been obtained over him in accordance with New York's long-arm statute. Inasmuch as the ground for Padula's motion could not have been fairly...
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
- Updated daily.
- Uncompromising quality.
- Complete, Accurate, Current.
