KRISTIN PULASKI KRISTIN PULASKI v. 170 LLC URBAN AMERICAN MANAGEMENT CORP (2026)

Recitation in accordance with CPLR 2219 (a) of the papers considered on the notice of motion filed on June 4, 2026, under motion sequence number one, by Kristin Pulaski as the mother and natural guardian for J.G., an infant and Kristin Pulaski individually (hereinafter the plaintiffs) for an order pursuant to CPLR 3215 (a) granting default judgment in favor of the plaintiffs and against Urban American Real Estate Fund II, LP, (hereinafter the defendant) and for an inquest on damages. The motion is unopposed.

Notice of motion

Affirmation in support

Exhibits A-B

BACKGROUND

On September 25, 2024, the plaintiffs commenced the instant action for damages for personal injuries against 170 North 5th Street Owner, LLC and Urban American Management Corp. by filing a summons and verified complaint (hereinafter the commencement papers) with the Kings County Clerk's office (hereinafter KCCO).

On December 11, 2024, the plaintiffs filed under NYSCEF Doc. No. 2 and NYSCEF Doc. No. 3 two affidavits of service of the commencement papers with the KCCO. Both affidavits of service were by Kerry Gunner, plaintiff's process server (hereinafter Gunner). In each one of his affidavits of service, Gunner averred that he served the commencement papers on defendant 170 North 5th Street Owner, LLC and on defendant Urban American Management Corp., on December 2, 2024, by serving each of them through the New York State Secretary of State.

On April 2, 2025, the plaintiff filed an amended summons and complaint adding 170 North 5th Street, LLC and Urban American Real Estate Fund II, LP as additional defendants.

LAW AND APPLICATION

On June 4, 2026, the plaintiffs filed the instant motion seeking an order pursuant to CPLR 3215 (a) granting default judgment in their favor and against Urban American Real Estate Fund II, LP and for an inquest on damages.

CPLR 1003 provides, in pertinent part, as follows:

" . . . [p]arties may be added at any stage of the action by leave of court or by stipulation of all parties who have appeared, or once without leave of court within twenty days after service of the original summons or at anytime before the period for responding to that summons expires or within twenty days after service of a pleading responding to it . . ."

CPLR 3025 provides, in pertinent part, as follows:

"(a) Amendments without leave. A party may amend his pleading once without leave of court within twenty days after its service, or at any time before the period for responding to it expires, or within twenty days after service of a pleading responding to it."

"(b) Amendments and supplemental pleadings by leave. A party may amend his or her pleading or supplement it by setting forth additional or subsequent transactions or occurrences, at any time by leave of court or by stipulation of all parties ."

"A plaintiff's failure to comply with CPLR 1003 when attempting to add a new defendant is a jurisdictional defect, and an amended complaint that is not filed in accordance with CPLR 1003 and 3025 is a legal nullity" ' (Braylovskaya v Skazka Restaurant, 231 AD3d 700, 701 [2d Dept 2024], quoting Bodkin v 112 Auto. Ctr., Inc., 214 AD3d 620, 621-622 [2d Dept 2023]).

Service of process on a corporation is deemed complete upon delivery to the Secretary of State (see Business Corporation Law § 306 [b] [1]; see Perkins v 686 Halsey Food Corp., 36 AD3d 881, 881 [2d Dept 2007]). "[S]ervice upon a limited liability company shall be complete when the Secretary of State, as their agent, has been personally served" (1KB & MS, LLC v Happy Living Construction, LLC, 228 AD3d 604 605-606 [2d Dept 2024]; see Limited Liability Company Law § 303 [a]).

"[I]f a summons is served on the secretary of state, an appearance by a defendant 'shall be made within thirty days after service is complete' " (Howard v McDonald's Corporation, 83 Misc 3d 1274[A], 2024 NY Slip Op 51096[U], *2 [Sup Ct, Kings County 2024], citing CPLR 320). In the case at bar, an appearance by defendants 170 North 5th Street Owner, LLC and Urban American Management Corp. was due on January 10, 2025, thirty days after service of process upon them had been completed.

In accordance with CPLR 320, the defendants North 5th Street Owner, LLC and Urban American Management Corp.'s time to appear in the action was January 10, 2025. On April 2, 2025, the plaintiff filed an amended summons and complaint adding 170 North 5th Street, LLC and Urban American Real Estate Fund II, LP as additional defendants. The filing of the amended summons and complaint was done over two months later, without leave of the Court. It was also done after the time amend the pleading, as of right, had expired.

Therefore, under these circumstances, since the plaintiff failed to comply with CPLR 1003 in the attempt to add Urban American Real Estate Fund II, LP as a defendant, the amended complaint was a legal nullity upon which a default judgment could not be entered against Urban American Real Estate Fund II, LP (see Braylovskaya v Skazka Restaurant, 231 AD3d 700, 701 [2d Dept 2024], citing Bodkin v 112 Auto. Ctr., Inc., 214 AD3d 620, 621-622 [2d Dept 2023], and citing Hulse v Wirth, 175 AD3d 1276, 1279 [2d Dept 2019]).

On April 9, 2025, the plaintiffs, the defendants 170 North 5th Street Owner, LLC, Urban American Management Corp., and an additional defendant 170 North 5th Street, LLC, entered into a stipulation (hereinafter the stipulation) to extend the defendants' time to address the amended summons and complaint to May 9, 2025. The stipulation, however, did not address or cure the jurisdictional defect caused by the null and improperly amended pleading. Notably, on April 2, 2025, when the amended summons and verified complaint was filed, no defendant had appeared in the action. Consequently, in accordance with CPLR 1003, the plaintiffs could not amend the summons and verified complaint by stipulation and could only do so with leave of the Court. Moreover, the stipulation was not, nor was it intended to be, an agreement by the parties consenting to the amending of the summons and verified complaint. In sum, the stipulation did not and could not address the nullity, which had already occurred.

CONCLUSION

The motion by the plaintiffs Kristin Pulaski, as the mother and natural guardian for J.G., an infant and Kristin Pulaski individually for an order pursuant to CPLR 3215 granting leave to enter a default judgment against Urban American Real Estate Fund II, LP and for an inquest on damages is denied.

The foregoing constitutes the decision and order of this Court.

ENTER:

J.S.C.

Francois A. Rivera, J.