delivery requirement in New York

20 New York opinions name it 4 courts 1883–2024 1 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by New York courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (7)

Case	Followed	Cited
Bossuk v. Steinberggreen ny · 1983 · cited in 4 New York opinions naming this issue, 1989–2024 2 sentences 2024"Whether [Rose R.] agreed or refused to accept service is irrelevant because the delivery requirement may be met by leaving the summons in the general vicinity of a person who resists service" ( Miske v Maher , 156 AD2d 986, 986 ; see Bossuk v Steinberg , 58 NY2d 916, 918 ; Hall v Wong , 119 AD3d 897 ; Spector v Berman , 119 AD2d 565, 565-566 ). 2003A process server may satisfy the delivery requirement “by leaving a copy of the summons outside the door of the person to be served upon refusal of ‘a person of suitable age and discretion’ to open the door to accept it, provided the process server informs the person to whom delivery is being made that this is being done” (Bossuk v Steinberg, 58 NY2d 916, 918 [1983], quoting CPLR 308 [2]).	4	4
AG Capital Funding Partners, L.P. v. State Street Bank & Trust Co.green ny · 2008 · cited in 1 New York opinions naming this issue, 2010–2010 1 sentence 2010Bank & Trust Co., 11 NY3d 146, 157 [2008]), and with the plain language of section 4.02, which states that “[d]elivery of such reports, information and documents [filed with the SEC] to the Trustee is for informational purposes only.” Plaintiffs’ proposed interpretation, on the other hand, would require indenture trustees to review the substance of SEC filings, so as to reduce the risk of liability, greatly expanding indenture trustees’ recognized administrative duties far beyond anything found in the contract.	1	1
Manhattan Theatre Club, Inc. v. Bohemian Benevolent & Literary Ass'n of the City of New Yorkgreen ny · 1985 · cited in 1 New York opinions naming this issue, 2005–2005 1 sentence 2005Because the delivery requirement was a condition precedent to the formation of any binding agreement, it could not be waived by the defendant (see Brois v DeLuca, 154 AD2d 417 [1989]; see also Manhattan Theatre Club v Bohemian Benevolent & Literary Assn. of City of N.Y., 64 NY2d 1069, 1070-1071 [1985]; Schwartz v Greenberg, 304 NY 250 [1952]).	1	1
Raanan v. Tom's Triangle, Inc.green nyappdiv · 2003 · cited in 1 New York opinions naming this issue, 2005–2005 1 sentence 2005Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly granted the defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and to direct the Kings County Clerk to vacate the notice of pendency (see Raanan v Tom’s Triangle, 303 AD2d 668, 669 [2003]).	1	1
People v. Tarsiagreen ny · 1980 · cited in 1 New York opinions naming this issue, 2004–2004 1 sentence 2004Accordingly, defendant’s present challenges to the delivery of this instruction and to the language employed by the court are unpreserved and review in the interest of justice would be inappropriate under the circumstances (see People v Tarsia, 50 NY2d 1, 8-9 [1980]; People v Aezah, 191 AD2d 312 [1993], lv denied 81 NY2d 1010 [1993]).	1	1
Charnin v. Cogangreen nyappdiv · 1998 · cited in 1 New York opinions naming this issue, 2000–2000 1 sentence 2000(Bossuk v Steinberg, 58 NY2d 916, 918 [1983]; Charnin v Cogan, 250 AD2d 513, 518 [1st Dept 1998]; Duffy v St.	1	1
219 Broadway Corp. v. Alexander's, Inc.green ny · 1979 · cited in 1 New York opinions naming this issue, 1983–1983	1	1

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

Case	Negative	Cited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in New York. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (41)

Case	Cited	Years
Hitai v. Immigration & Naturalization Service green scotus · 1965 2 sentences 1980On this basis, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals found delivery insufficient in Mertens v Flying Tiger Line (341 F2d 851, cert den 382 US 816 ). 1969A. 2d], cert. den. 382 U. S. 816 .) Thereafter, in Lisi v. Alitalia (supra) it was held that a notice of the limitations printed in miniscule type was no notice at all and did not afford the plaintiff the protection sought to be granted to him by the Convention’s requirement of delivery of the ticket.	2	1969–1980
Spector v. Berman green nyappdiv · 1986 1 sentence 2024"Whether [Rose R.] agreed or refused to accept service is irrelevant because the delivery requirement may be met by leaving the summons in the general vicinity of a person who resists service" ( Miske v Maher , 156 AD2d 986, 986 ; see Bossuk v Steinberg , 58 NY2d 916, 918 ; Hall v Wong , 119 AD3d 897 ; Spector v Berman , 119 AD2d 565, 565-566 ).	1	2024–2024
Miske v. Maher green nyappdiv · 1989 2 sentences 2024"Whether [Rose R.] agreed or refused to accept service is irrelevant because the delivery requirement may be met by leaving the summons in the general vicinity of a person who resists service" ( Miske v Maher , 156 AD2d 986, 986 ; see Bossuk v Steinberg , 58 NY2d 916, 918 ; Hall v Wong , 119 AD3d 897 ; Spector v Berman , 119 AD2d 565, 565-566 ). 2024Since service pursuant to CPLR 308(1) could have been made with due diligence, the process server's resort to substituted service pursuant to CPLR 308(4) was improper and did not confer personal jurisdiction over Rose R. ( see Ramirez v Romualdo , 25 AD3d 680 ; Miske v Maher , 156 AD2d 986 ).	1	2024–2024
Ramirez v. Romualdo green nyappdiv · 2006 1 sentence 2024Since service pursuant to CPLR 308(1) could have been made with due diligence, the process server's resort to substituted service pursuant to CPLR 308(4) was improper and did not confer personal jurisdiction over Rose R. ( see Ramirez v Romualdo , 25 AD3d 680 ; Miske v Maher , 156 AD2d 986 ).	1	2024–2024
Hall v. Wong green nyappdiv · 2014 1 sentence 2024"Whether [Rose R.] agreed or refused to accept service is irrelevant because the delivery requirement may be met by leaving the summons in the general vicinity of a person who resists service" ( Miske v Maher , 156 AD2d 986, 986 ; see Bossuk v Steinberg , 58 NY2d 916, 918 ; Hall v Wong , 119 AD3d 897 ; Spector v Berman , 119 AD2d 565, 565-566 ).	1	2024–2024
Reese v. 100 Church Street LLC neutral nyappdiv · 2014 2 sentences 2015On appeal, the Appellate Division declined to disturb the conviction, concluding, in relevant part, that defendant’s objection to the disputed parts of the detective’s testimony “did not preserve [defendant’s] Confrontation Clause claim” and, in the alternative, that there was “no Confrontation Clause violation . . . because the evidence was admissible for a legitimate purpose other than its truth” ( 113 AD3d 553 , 554 [2014]). 2015On appeal, the Appellate Division declined to disturb the conviction, concluding, in relevant part, that defendant's objection to the disputed parts of the detective's testimony "did not preserve [defendant's] Confrontation Clause claim" and, in the alternative, that there was "no Confrontation Clause violation[] because the evidence was admissible for a legitimate purpose other than its truth" ( 113 AD3d 553 , 554 [2014]).	1	2015–2015
Wyeth Ayerst Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Assessor of the Town of Champlain green nyappdiv · 2005 1 sentence 2006RPTL 708 (2) provides: “In a city of over one million population having a tax commission, service of the petition shall be made by delivering a copy thereof to the president of the tax commission of such city or his duly authorized agent.” Mailing does not satisfy this delivery requirement (see Matter of Wyeth Ayerst Pharms., Inc. v Assessor of Town of Champlain, 24 AD3d 849 [2005]).	1	2006–2006
Brois v. DeLuca green nyappdiv · 1989 1 sentence 2005Because the delivery requirement was a condition precedent to the formation of any binding agreement, it could not be waived by the defendant (see Brois v DeLuca, 154 AD2d 417 [1989]; see also Manhattan Theatre Club v Bohemian Benevolent & Literary Assn. of City of N.Y., 64 NY2d 1069, 1070-1071 [1985]; Schwartz v Greenberg, 304 NY 250 [1952]).	1	2005–2005
Schwartz v. Greenberg green ny · 1952 1 sentence 2005Because the delivery requirement was a condition precedent to the formation of any binding agreement, it could not be waived by the defendant (see Brois v DeLuca, 154 AD2d 417 [1989]; see also Manhattan Theatre Club v Bohemian Benevolent & Literary Assn. of City of N.Y., 64 NY2d 1069, 1070-1071 [1985]; Schwartz v Greenberg, 304 NY 250 [1952]).	1	2005–2005
People v. Aezah green nyappdiv · 1993 1 sentence 2004Accordingly, defendant’s present challenges to the delivery of this instruction and to the language employed by the court are unpreserved and review in the interest of justice would be inappropriate under the circumstances (see People v Tarsia, 50 NY2d 1, 8-9 [1980]; People v Aezah, 191 AD2d 312 [1993], lv denied 81 NY2d 1010 [1993]).	1	2004–2004
National Bank of North America v. Stadium Productions, Inc. neutral nyappdiv · 1975 1 sentence 2003Assuming that the appellant complied with the delivery requirement, she has not, “however, complied with the concomitant requirement that the notice be ‘duly receipted for by’ the bank” (National Bank of N. Am. v Stadium Prods., 47 AD2d 847, 848 ).	1	2003–2003
People v. Bonaparte green ny · 1991 1 sentence 1995The response to the jury’s question formulated by the court constituted an instruction on a question of law, and thus the delivery of this instruction to the jury should not have been delegated to the clerk (see, People v Coons, 75 NY2d 796 ; People v Torres, 72 NY2d 1007 ; People v Mehmedi, 69 NY2d 759 ; People v Ahmed, 66 NY2d 307 ; People v Lara, 199 AD2d 419 ; People v Rogoski, 194 AD2d 754 ; People v Jones, 159 AD2d 644 ; cf., People v Lykes, 81 NY2d 767 ; People v Bonaparte, 78 NY2d 26 ; People v Buxton, 192 AD2d 289 ; People v Harrison, 192 AD2d 551 ; People v Torres, 191 AD2d 601 ; Peo	1	1995–1995
People v. Lykes green ny · 1993 1 sentence 1995The response to the jury’s question formulated by the court constituted an instruction on a question of law, and thus the delivery of this instruction to the jury should not have been delegated to the clerk (see, People v Coons, 75 NY2d 796 ; People v Torres, 72 NY2d 1007 ; People v Mehmedi, 69 NY2d 759 ; People v Ahmed, 66 NY2d 307 ; People v Lara, 199 AD2d 419 ; People v Rogoski, 194 AD2d 754 ; People v Jones, 159 AD2d 644 ; cf., People v Lykes, 81 NY2d 767 ; People v Bonaparte, 78 NY2d 26 ; People v Buxton, 192 AD2d 289 ; People v Harrison, 192 AD2d 551 ; People v Torres, 191 AD2d 601 ; Peo	1	1995–1995
People v. Jones neutral nyappdiv · 1990 1 sentence 1995The response to the jury’s question formulated by the court constituted an instruction on a question of law, and thus the delivery of this instruction to the jury should not have been delegated to the clerk (see, People v Coons, 75 NY2d 796 ; People v Torres, 72 NY2d 1007 ; People v Mehmedi, 69 NY2d 759 ; People v Ahmed, 66 NY2d 307 ; People v Lara, 199 AD2d 419 ; People v Rogoski, 194 AD2d 754 ; People v Jones, 159 AD2d 644 ; cf., People v Lykes, 81 NY2d 767 ; People v Bonaparte, 78 NY2d 26 ; People v Buxton, 192 AD2d 289 ; People v Harrison, 192 AD2d 551 ; People v Torres, 191 AD2d 601 ; Peo	1	1995–1995
People v. Torres green ny · 1988 1 sentence 1995The response to the jury’s question formulated by the court constituted an instruction on a question of law, and thus the delivery of this instruction to the jury should not have been delegated to the clerk (see, People v Coons, 75 NY2d 796 ; People v Torres, 72 NY2d 1007 ; People v Mehmedi, 69 NY2d 759 ; People v Ahmed, 66 NY2d 307 ; People v Lara, 199 AD2d 419 ; People v Rogoski, 194 AD2d 754 ; People v Jones, 159 AD2d 644 ; cf., People v Lykes, 81 NY2d 767 ; People v Bonaparte, 78 NY2d 26 ; People v Buxton, 192 AD2d 289 ; People v Harrison, 192 AD2d 551 ; People v Torres, 191 AD2d 601 ; Peo	1	1995–1995
People v. Smith neutral nyappdiv · 1992 1 sentence 1995The response to the jury’s question formulated by the court constituted an instruction on a question of law, and thus the delivery of this instruction to the jury should not have been delegated to the clerk (see, People v Coons, 75 NY2d 796 ; People v Torres, 72 NY2d 1007 ; People v Mehmedi, 69 NY2d 759 ; People v Ahmed, 66 NY2d 307 ; People v Lara, 199 AD2d 419 ; People v Rogoski, 194 AD2d 754 ; People v Jones, 159 AD2d 644 ; cf., People v Lykes, 81 NY2d 767 ; People v Bonaparte, 78 NY2d 26 ; People v Buxton, 192 AD2d 289 ; People v Harrison, 192 AD2d 551 ; People v Torres, 191 AD2d 601 ; Peo	1	1995–1995
People v. Torres neutral nyappdiv · 1993 1 sentence 1995The response to the jury’s question formulated by the court constituted an instruction on a question of law, and thus the delivery of this instruction to the jury should not have been delegated to the clerk (see, People v Coons, 75 NY2d 796 ; People v Torres, 72 NY2d 1007 ; People v Mehmedi, 69 NY2d 759 ; People v Ahmed, 66 NY2d 307 ; People v Lara, 199 AD2d 419 ; People v Rogoski, 194 AD2d 754 ; People v Jones, 159 AD2d 644 ; cf., People v Lykes, 81 NY2d 767 ; People v Bonaparte, 78 NY2d 26 ; People v Buxton, 192 AD2d 289 ; People v Harrison, 192 AD2d 551 ; People v Torres, 191 AD2d 601 ; Peo	1	1995–1995
People v. Buxton green nyappdiv · 1993 1 sentence 1995The response to the jury’s question formulated by the court constituted an instruction on a question of law, and thus the delivery of this instruction to the jury should not have been delegated to the clerk (see, People v Coons, 75 NY2d 796 ; People v Torres, 72 NY2d 1007 ; People v Mehmedi, 69 NY2d 759 ; People v Ahmed, 66 NY2d 307 ; People v Lara, 199 AD2d 419 ; People v Rogoski, 194 AD2d 754 ; People v Jones, 159 AD2d 644 ; cf., People v Lykes, 81 NY2d 767 ; People v Bonaparte, 78 NY2d 26 ; People v Buxton, 192 AD2d 289 ; People v Harrison, 192 AD2d 551 ; People v Torres, 191 AD2d 601 ; Peo	1	1995–1995
People v. Harrison neutral nyappdiv · 1993 1 sentence 1995The response to the jury’s question formulated by the court constituted an instruction on a question of law, and thus the delivery of this instruction to the jury should not have been delegated to the clerk (see, People v Coons, 75 NY2d 796 ; People v Torres, 72 NY2d 1007 ; People v Mehmedi, 69 NY2d 759 ; People v Ahmed, 66 NY2d 307 ; People v Lara, 199 AD2d 419 ; People v Rogoski, 194 AD2d 754 ; People v Jones, 159 AD2d 644 ; cf., People v Lykes, 81 NY2d 767 ; People v Bonaparte, 78 NY2d 26 ; People v Buxton, 192 AD2d 289 ; People v Harrison, 192 AD2d 551 ; People v Torres, 191 AD2d 601 ; Peo	1	1995–1995
People v. Rogoski green nyappdiv · 1993 1 sentence 1995The response to the jury’s question formulated by the court constituted an instruction on a question of law, and thus the delivery of this instruction to the jury should not have been delegated to the clerk (see, People v Coons, 75 NY2d 796 ; People v Torres, 72 NY2d 1007 ; People v Mehmedi, 69 NY2d 759 ; People v Ahmed, 66 NY2d 307 ; People v Lara, 199 AD2d 419 ; People v Rogoski, 194 AD2d 754 ; People v Jones, 159 AD2d 644 ; cf., People v Lykes, 81 NY2d 767 ; People v Bonaparte, 78 NY2d 26 ; People v Buxton, 192 AD2d 289 ; People v Harrison, 192 AD2d 551 ; People v Torres, 191 AD2d 601 ; Peo	1	1995–1995
People v. Lara green nyappdiv · 1993 1 sentence 1995The response to the jury’s question formulated by the court constituted an instruction on a question of law, and thus the delivery of this instruction to the jury should not have been delegated to the clerk (see, People v Coons, 75 NY2d 796 ; People v Torres, 72 NY2d 1007 ; People v Mehmedi, 69 NY2d 759 ; People v Ahmed, 66 NY2d 307 ; People v Lara, 199 AD2d 419 ; People v Rogoski, 194 AD2d 754 ; People v Jones, 159 AD2d 644 ; cf., People v Lykes, 81 NY2d 767 ; People v Bonaparte, 78 NY2d 26 ; People v Buxton, 192 AD2d 289 ; People v Harrison, 192 AD2d 551 ; People v Torres, 191 AD2d 601 ; Peo	1	1995–1995
People v. Mehmedi green ny · 1987 1 sentence 1995The response to the jury’s question formulated by the court constituted an instruction on a question of law, and thus the delivery of this instruction to the jury should not have been delegated to the clerk (see, People v Coons, 75 NY2d 796 ; People v Torres, 72 NY2d 1007 ; People v Mehmedi, 69 NY2d 759 ; People v Ahmed, 66 NY2d 307 ; People v Lara, 199 AD2d 419 ; People v Rogoski, 194 AD2d 754 ; People v Jones, 159 AD2d 644 ; cf., People v Lykes, 81 NY2d 767 ; People v Bonaparte, 78 NY2d 26 ; People v Buxton, 192 AD2d 289 ; People v Harrison, 192 AD2d 551 ; People v Torres, 191 AD2d 601 ; Peo	1	1995–1995
People v. Ahmed green ny · 1985 1 sentence 1995The response to the jury’s question formulated by the court constituted an instruction on a question of law, and thus the delivery of this instruction to the jury should not have been delegated to the clerk (see, People v Coons, 75 NY2d 796 ; People v Torres, 72 NY2d 1007 ; People v Mehmedi, 69 NY2d 759 ; People v Ahmed, 66 NY2d 307 ; People v Lara, 199 AD2d 419 ; People v Rogoski, 194 AD2d 754 ; People v Jones, 159 AD2d 644 ; cf., People v Lykes, 81 NY2d 767 ; People v Bonaparte, 78 NY2d 26 ; People v Buxton, 192 AD2d 289 ; People v Harrison, 192 AD2d 551 ; People v Torres, 191 AD2d 601 ; Peo	1	1995–1995
People v. Coons green ny · 1990 1 sentence 1995The response to the jury’s question formulated by the court constituted an instruction on a question of law, and thus the delivery of this instruction to the jury should not have been delegated to the clerk (see, People v Coons, 75 NY2d 796 ; People v Torres, 72 NY2d 1007 ; People v Mehmedi, 69 NY2d 759 ; People v Ahmed, 66 NY2d 307 ; People v Lara, 199 AD2d 419 ; People v Rogoski, 194 AD2d 754 ; People v Jones, 159 AD2d 644 ; cf., People v Lykes, 81 NY2d 767 ; People v Bonaparte, 78 NY2d 26 ; People v Buxton, 192 AD2d 289 ; People v Harrison, 192 AD2d 551 ; People v Torres, 191 AD2d 601 ; Peo	1	1995–1995
People v. Soto green nyappdiv · 1993	1	1994–1994
Faravelli v. Bankers Trust Co. green nyappdiv · 1982	1	1991–1991
Faravelli v. Bankers Trust Co. green · 1983	1	1991–1991
Levin v. McGovern green nyappdiv · 1976	1	1989–1989
Nuri Farhadi, Inc. v. Anavian green nyappdiv · 1977	1	1989–1989
Rossetti v. DeLaGarza neutral nyappdiv · 1986	1	1989–1989
Galuski v. Tutunjian green nyappdiv · 1987	1	1989–1989
Rose v. Spa Realty Associates green ny · 1977	1	1989–1989
Alitalia-Linee Aeree Italiane, S. P. A. v. Lisi green scotus · 1968	1	1980–1980
Egan v. Kollsman Instrument Corp. green ny · 1967	1	1980–1980
Lisi v. Alitalia-Linee Aeree Italiane green nysd · 1966	1	1969–1969
Mertens v. Flying Tiger Line green ca2 · 1965	1	1969–1969
Coolidge v. Old Colony Trust Co. green mass · 1927	1	1931–1931
Procter & Gamble Co. v. Peters, White & Co. green ny · 1922	1	1931–1931
Richardson v. Rogers neutral nysupct · 1875	1	1892–1892
Russell v. . Freer green ny · 1874	1	1892–1892

Where else courts name it

NY 20 (1883–2024) CA 17 (1875–2024) NC 15 (2009–2022) TX 12 (1878–2013) PA 8 (1934–2021) ME 7 (2017–2025) IL 6 (1937–2025) MO 5 (1909–2016) IN 4 (1886–1985) MI 4 (1993–2025) OR 4 (2002–2018) AL 4 (1989–2004) NJ 4 (1950–2004) CT 4 (1966–2014) WI 3 (2012–2023) UT 3 (1981–2021) ID 2 (2009–2012) OH 2 (2009–2011) GA 2 (1955–1997) TN 2 (1933–1933) WA 2 (1984–2016) FL 2 (2022–2022)

Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check