KUANG v. ZHOU (2023)

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Margaret Chan, J.), entered April 13, 2022, which denied plaintiff's motion for a default judgment against defendant Xiao Ming Yang, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Plaintiff failed to demonstrate entitlement to a default judgment (see CPLR 3215[f]) because she attempted to serve Yang by priority mail at an attorney's office, which is insufficient as a matter of law (CPLR 308[1]-[4]).  Furthermore, plaintiff could not properly submit “proof of the facts constituting the claim” (CPLR 3215[f]), since, as this Court previously held, “plaintiff was collaterally estopped from relitigating the issue of entitlement to the life insurance proceeds” that was the subject of a prior action in Supreme Court, Queens County, in which both plaintiff and Yang were parties, the “remaining allegations failed to state a claim,” and to the extent that plaintiff might have otherwise stated any claim, the statute of limitations expired (Hong Hui Kuang v. Jie Wen Zhou, 212 A.D.3d 579, 579–580, 180 N.Y.S.3d 900 [1st Dept. 2023];  see Honghui Kuang v. MetLife, 197 A.D.3d 1101, 1102, 150 N.Y.S.3d 617 [2d Dept. 2021];  Honghui Kuang v. MetLife, 159 A.D.3d 878, 879–882, 74 N.Y.S.3d 88 [2d Dept. 2018]).

We have considered plaintiff's remaining contentions and find them unavailing.