224 Lefferts Avenue Housing Development Fund Corporation v Haile
Attorneys and Parties
Brief Summary
Civil procedure—limits on collateral attacks on default judgments; authority to amend pleadings/judgments to correct a misnamed defendant.
Denied the fund's motion for a declaration, granted the respondent leave to amend the 2014 action to substitute the fund for the misnamed corporate defendant and to deem service effective without further service, granted leave to amend the 2017 default judgment to substitute the fund, and dismissed the declaratory judgment complaint under CPLR 3211(a) [rule allowing dismissal for, among other grounds, lack of subject matter jurisdiction or failure to state a cause of action].
The grants permitting amendment of the 2014 pleadings and the 2017 default judgment, and deeming service effective without further service, were reversed.
The Supreme Court lacked subject matter jurisdiction to entertain a collateral attack on personal jurisdiction in a separate declaratory action; the proper remedy is a motion to vacate under CPLR 5015(a)(4) [authorizes vacating a judgment for lack of jurisdiction]. Additionally, the court lacked authority under CPLR 5019(a) [permits correction of clerical mistakes, not substantive changes, in judgments/orders] to amend pleadings or a judgment issued by a different justice in a different action.
Background
In 2014, Faith Haile sued 224 Lefferts Avenue Housing Development Corp. for injuries from a fall at premises owned by that corporation. The corporation defaulted, and a default judgment was entered in July 2017. In 2023, 224 Lefferts Avenue Housing Development Fund Corporation commenced a declaratory judgment action seeking a declaration that the 2017 default judgment was not enforceable against it, arguing it was a different entity. Haile opposed and cross-moved to amend the 2014 action and the 2017 judgment to substitute the fund for the misnamed corporation and to deem service effective, and also to dismiss the declaratory action.
Lower Court Decision
The Supreme Court (Kings County) found the fund had been served in 2014 under an incorrect name, denied the fund's declaratory motion, granted Haile leave to amend the 2014 pleadings and the 2017 default judgment to substitute the fund and to deem service effective without further service, and dismissed the declaratory judgment complaint under CPLR 3211(a).
Appellate Division Reversal
Modified: reversed the grants allowing amendment of the 2014 pleadings and the 2017 judgment and the deeming of service without further service, holding the court lacked authority to amend pleadings or a judgment issued by a different justice in a different action under CPLR 5019(a). Affirmed the dismissal of the declaratory action, but on the ground that the Supreme Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over a collateral attack on personal jurisdiction; the fund's remedy, if any, is to move in the 2014 action to vacate the default under CPLR 5015(a)(4).
Legal Significance
Reaffirms that parties may not collaterally attack personal jurisdiction via a new declaratory judgment action in Supreme Court; they must seek vacatur in the original action under CPLR 5015(a)(4). Clarifies that CPLR 5019(a) does not permit substantive amendments to pleadings or judgments—especially those issued by a different justice in a different action—under the guise of correcting a misnomer.
A misnamed defendant cannot be retroactively substituted and a default judgment amended in a separate action by a different justice; challenges to personal jurisdiction must proceed by a CPLR 5015(a)(4) motion in the original case, not by a collateral declaratory action.