-Validity of CPLR 308(1) personal service via in-hand delivery to defendant.
-Process server testified that she delivered Summons at Queens, New York, address to man who saw defendant’s name on Summons and acknowledged that he was the named defendant.
-Process server’s testimony regarding operation of GPS tracker in documenting date, time and location of service.
-Extensive legal argument on foundation required for admissibility, as business record, of photograph imprinted with date, time and coordinates generated by GPS tracker.
-Defendant testified that he was in Bronx, New York, at the time he was allegedly served with process in Queens, New York.
-Defendant produced GPS timeline from his cellular phone in support of his claim that he was in Bronx, not Queens, at time of alleged service.
– Defendant denied having met process server or being at the service location at time claimed by process server. Extensive testimony by defendant and his friend that defendant neither resided nor worked at the location described by process server and that defendant merely maintained a mailbox at premises, where his friend had an office.
-Defendant’s business associate testified that he was with defendant in the Bronx at the time process server claimed she personally served defendant in Queens.
-Process server (direct examination; cross-examination)
-Defendant’s friend (direct examination; cross-examination; redirect examination; recross examination)
-Defendant (direct examination; cross-examination; redirect examination; recross examination)
-Defendant’s business associate (direct examination; cross-examination; redirect examination)