Opinion
06-01-2016
Pramod BHANTI, et al., appellants, v. Prakash JHA, respondent.
Jennifer B. Ettenger, Melville, NY, for appellants. Nesenoff & Miltenberg, LLP, New York, NY (Philip A. Byler, Andrew T. Miltenberg, and Megan S. Goddard of counsel), for respondent.
Jennifer B. Ettenger, Melville, NY, for appellants.
Nesenoff & Miltenberg, LLP, New York, NY (Philip A. Byler, Andrew T. Miltenberg, and Megan S. Goddard of counsel), for respondent.
In an action to recover on a promissory note, commenced by motion for summary judgment in lieu of complaint pursuant to CPLR 3213, the plaintiffs appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Martin, J.), dated February 26, 2014, as granted that branch of the defendant's motion which was to dismiss the action.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.
The plaintiffs commenced this action to recover on a promissory note by motion for summary judgment in lieu of complaint pursuant to CPLR 3213. However, they made the motion returnable on a date prior to the expiration of the time within which the defendant had to appear in the action, which was a fatal jurisdictional defect (see Segway of N. Y., Inc. v. Udit Group, Inc., 120 A.D.3d 789, 792, 992 N.Y.S.2d 524 ). Therefore, the Supreme Court properly granted that branch of the defendant's motion which was to dismiss the action.
The plaintiffs' remaining contention is improperly raised for the first time on appeal (see Orellano v Samples Tire Equip. & Supply Corp., 110 A.D.2d 757, 758, 488 N.Y.S.2d 211 ).
BALKIN, J.P., LEVENTHAL, AUSTIN and DUFFY, JJ., concur.