Opinion
November 6, 1997
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Karla Moskowitz, J.).
The finding of jurisdiction is sufficiently supported by the testimony of the process server at the traverse hearing that, on the day in question, after a person who appeared to be a nurse pointed to and identified a nearby person as being defendant, he delivered the summons and complaint to that person, who generally matched the physical description of defendant that had been given to him and who identified himself as being defendant. Neither the minor inaccuracies in the process server's description of defendant in his affidavit of service, nor defendant's unsubstantiated claim that at the alleged time of service he was not at the alleged place of service, warrant disturbing the Special Referee's findings crediting the process server and discrediting defendant and his witness (see, Black v Pappalardo, 132 A.D.2d 640; Kardanis v. Velis, 90 A.D.2d 727).
Concur — Milonas, J. P., Ellerin, Wallach and Rubin, JJ.