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: John VELEZ, Appellant, v. DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONAL SERVICES, Respondent.
Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (Clemente, J.), entered June 6, 2005 in Albany County, which, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, granted respondent's motion to dismiss the petition for lack of personal jurisdiction.
Petitioner commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding challenging the denial of his grievance regarding the alleged lack of proper medical treatment. Supreme Court granted respondent's motion to dismiss the petition for lack of personal jurisdiction and we affirm. The order to show cause directed petitioner to serve respondent and the Attorney General with the order to show cause, petition and other supporting affidavits by first class mail on or before March 25, 2005. Affidavits on behalf of the Attorney General and respondent state that the necessary documents were not received by their offices until March 31, 2005 and April 1, 2005, respectively. Moreover, the envelope addressed to the Attorney General was not postmarked until March 28, 2005. While petitioner relies on his sworn affidavit of service indicating that he mailed the documents on March 16, 2005 in support of his claim that his incarceration interfered with his ability to effect timely service as directed in the order to show cause, the date of the notary, March 8, 2004, is prior to the date upon which petitioner claims he mailed the documents. Inasmuch as petitioner failed to comply with the service requirements as directed in the order to show cause in a timely manner, Supreme Court properly dismissed the petition (see Matter of Sosa v. New York State Div. of Parole, 18 A.D.3d 1047, 795 N.Y.S.2d 775 [2005]; Matter of Burnside v. Lacy, 269 A.D.2d 634, 703 N.Y.S.2d 810 [2000] ). Even if the year 2004 was a typographical error, the day March 8, which was handwritten, was eight days prior to the mailing.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Decided: February 09, 2006
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third 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)