Per Curiam.
In their amended answer, by way of an affirmative defense, the defendants for the first time objected to jurisdiction, alleging that "the Court does not have jurisdiction of the person of either of the defendants herein in that neither of the defendants were served with a copy of the summons." The motion, not being made "before service of the responsive pleading" (CPLR 3211, subd. [e]), was not timely and should have been denied on that ground....
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.
