et al., Plaintiff, v. UPTOWN COLLISION INC (1997)

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.

Mark WILLIAMS, Respondent, et al., Plaintiff, v. UPTOWN COLLISION, INC., et al., Appellants.

Decided: October 06, 1997

Before MANGANO, P.J., and ROSENBLATT, PIZZUTO and LUCIANO, JJ.

Zawacki, Everett, Gray & McLaughlin, New York City (Michael Weaver, of counsel), for appellants.

In a negligence action, inter alia, to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Kramer, J.), dated August 13, 1996, which denied their motion to dismiss the action.

ORDERED that the order is reversed, on the law, without costs or disbursements, the motion is granted, and the complaint is dismissed.

The court erred in holding that the defendants waived the defense of lack of personal jurisdiction asserted in their answer. Neither their counterclaim for indemnification (see, Textile Technology Exch. v. Davis, 81 N.Y.2d 56, 58-59, 595 N.Y.S.2d 729, 611 N.E.2d 768) nor their participation in discovery (see, Calloway v. National Servs. Inds., 93 A.D.2d 734, 461 N.Y.S.2d 280, affd. 60 N.Y.2d 906, 470 N.Y.S.2d 583, 458 N.E.2d 1260; see also, Beris v. Miller, 128 A.D.2d 822, 513 N.Y.S.2d 744; McNeely v. Harrison, 208 A.D.2d 909, 617 N.Y.S.2d 879) constituted a waiver of that defense. Since the court had no personal jurisdiction over the defendants, the motion to dismiss should have been granted.

MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

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.

Explore the Network