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.
GREENPOINT BANK, respondent, v. Andrew C. SCHIFFER, et al., appellants, et al., defendants.
In an action to foreclose a mortgage, the defendants appeal from (1) an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (DiBlasi, J.), dated October 17, 1997, which, inter alia, denied their cross motion to dismiss the complaint insofar as asserted against them on the ground of improper service, (2) an order of the same court, dated October 21, 1997, which, inter alia, granted the plaintiff's motion for summary judgment against them, and (3) a judgment of foreclosure and sale of the same court, dated May 5, 1998.
ORDERED that the appeals from the orders are dismissed; and it is further,
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed; and it is further,
ORDERED that the respondent is awarded one bill of costs.
The appeal from the intermediate orders must be dismissed because the right of direct appeal therefrom terminated with the entry of judgment in the action (see, Matter of Aho, 39 N.Y.2d 241, 383 N.Y.S.2d 285, 347 N.E.2d 647). The issues raised on the appeals from the orders are brought up for review and have been considered on the appeal from the judgment (see, CPLR 5501 [a][1] ).
The appellants waived their defense of lack of personal jurisdiction based on improper service by failing to move for a judgment on that ground within 60 days after service of their answer, and they failed to allege any undue hardship warranting an extension of the statutory period (see, CPLR 3211 [e] ). Therefore, the Supreme Court properly denied their cross motion to dismiss the complaint insofar as asserted against them on the ground of improper service.
The appellants' remaining contentions are without merit.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
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.
Decided: November 08, 1999
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second 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)