Gurevitch v. Goodman

In Gurevitch v. Goodman, 269 A.D.2d 355, 702 N.Y.S.2d 634 ( 2nd Dept. 2000), the Court concluded that the three (3) attempts to serve the defendant failed to satisfy the due diligence requirement. The affidavit of the plaintiff's process server, together with the papers submitted in opposition to the motion, failed to demonstrate that the process server attempted to ascertain the [defendant's] business address and to effectuate personal service at that location, pursuant to the provisions of CPLR308 (1) and (2). Under those circumstances, the attempted service of the summons and complaint pursuant to CPLR 308 (4) was defective as a matter of law. Id. at 355-56; See also, Earle v. Valente, 302 A.D.2d 353, 754 N.Y.S.2d 364 ( 2nd Dept. 2003) (attempted service pursuant to CPLR 308 (4) was defective as a matter of law).