After JLP sued REI and others for breach of contract, HC -- one of the defendants -- tried to get the case brought against him dismissed, arguing that the court didn't have jurisdiction over him because he wasn't properly served with the legal papers.
After the Queens County Supreme Court denied the motion and found that the process server's affidavit (a sworn statement) evinced that HC had been properly served (by leaving the papers with “a person of suitable age and discretion” at HC’s "last known address"), an appeal ensued.
On its review, the Appellate Division, Second Department, agreed that HCs claim that he didn't live with the person who received the papers was “insufficient to rebut the presumption of proper service created by the process server's affidavit,” and the denial of dismissal was left undisturbed.
Did they do him a disservice there?
# # #
DECISION