Summary
concluding that, when the person who received service of process had interests "adverse to those of the respondent, ... it would be inappropriate for him to act as the recipient of service for [the respondent]"
Summary of this case from Heald v. HealdOpinion
February 23, 1987
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Vaccaro, J.).
Ordered that the order and judgment is affirmed, with costs.
Under the facts and circumstances of this case, we find that personal jurisdiction was not obtained over the respondent. The petitioners' attempted service of process upon the respondent pursuant to CPLR 308 (2) must fail as the person "of suitable age and discretion" with whom the petitioners left the papers was Dr. J. Jerome Harris, the Superintendent of the petitioner Community School District No. 13. While not named as a party, in a case such as this, the interests of Dr. Harris, Chief Executive Officer of the petitioner community school district, must be considered to be adverse to those of the respondent, and as such it would be inappropriate for him to act as the recipient of service for him (see, City of New York v. Chemical Bank, 122 Misc.2d 104). In reaching this decision we note in passing the many irregularities in the papers served by the petitioners, and further that at all pertinent times the respondent was in the petitioners' employ, and available for personal service on a daily basis in the petitioner Community School District No. 13's own office. In light of all the above circumstances, Special Term properly found that service was improper, and jurisdiction over the respondent was not obtained. Thompson, J.P., Lawrence, Kunzeman and Sullivan, JJ., concur.