Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
IN RE: Gheorghe PETRE, Petitioner–Appellant, v. Joseph LUCIA et al., Respondents–Respondents.
Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Elizabeth A. Taylor, J), entered on or about June 14, 2021, and order, same court (Wilma Guzman, J.), entered on or about October 4, 2021, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the brief, denied plaintiff's motions for a default judgment against defendants, unanimously affirmed, without costs, without prejudice to refiling the motion upon proper papers.
Supreme Court properly denied plaintiff's motions for a default judgment, as plaintiff did not satisfy the requirements of CPLR 3215(f). Plaintiff failed to provide accurate proof of service of the summons and complaint. The affidavits of service submitted by plaintiff state service of the pleadings was completed on January 4, 2020, but the pleadings are dated in December 2020 – 11 months later. Although plaintiff averred that service of the pleadings on defendants was completed on January 4, 2021, and that there was an error in the affidavits of service, this is not a minor error, as facially the affidavits of service state that service was completed more than a year before the first motion for a default judgment was filed. Thus, if plaintiff seeks to refile the motion for a default judgment, he must submit corrected affidavits of service by the process server, with accurate dates of service, and identifying John Doe by his full name.
While the absence of a valid nonmilitary affidavit may be a simple irregularity and not a jurisdictional defect (see Gantt v. North Shore–LIJ Health Sys., 140 A.D.3d 418, 418, 31 N.Y.S.3d 864 [1st Dept. 2016]), the nonmilitary affidavit is a requirement under federal law for any civil action in order to protect military personnel from default judgments (see 50 USC § 3931). Thus, plaintiff should have filed an affidavit stating whether any of the defendants are in military service, providing necessary facts to support the affidavit, or, if he was unable to determine if defendants are in military service, stating so (see Unitrin Advantage Ins. Co. v. 21st Century Pharm., 158 A.D.3d 450, 451, 67 N.Y.S.3d 826 [1st Dept. 2018]; Avgush v. De La Cruz, 30 Misc.3d 133[A], 2011 N.Y. Slip Op. 50076[U], 2011 WL 255554 [App. Term, 2d Dept., 9th & 10th Jud. Dists. 2011]).
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Docket No: 15856-15856A
Decided: May 03, 2022
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)