Respondent Escoffier, as limited by his briefs, appeals from (1) that portion of an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, New York County (Michelle D. Schreiber, J.), dated November 7, 2011, which granted petitioner's motion to dismiss respondent's first affirmative defense of lack of personal jurisdiction, and (2) a final judgment of the same court (Cheryl J. Gonzalez, J.), entered October 16, 2012, after a nonjury trial, which awarded petitioner possession and a recovery of maintenance arrears in the principal sum of $44,954, in a nonpayment summary proceeding.

Per Curiam.

Final judgment (Cheryl J. Gonzalez, J.), entered October 16, 2012, affirmed, with $25 costs, for the reasons stated by Cheryl J. Gonzalez, J. at Civil Court. Appeal from order (Michelle D. Schreiber, J.), dated November 7, 2011, dismissed, without costs, as subsumed in the appeal from the final judgment.

Giving due deference to the trial court's detailed factual findings, we find no cause to disturb the court's resolution of the rent/maintenance issues litigated below. The evidence warranted a finding that petitioner landlord was owed the full maintenance amount demanded in the nonpayment petition, as amended, and that respondent-appellant advanced no meritorious defense to petitioner's maintenance claim. With respect to personal jurisdiction, the affidavit of petitioner's process server constituted prima facie evidence of proper service pursuant to RPAPL 735(1) (see Eight Assoc. v Hynes, 102 AD2d 746, 748 [1984], affd 65 NY2d 739 [1985]), and respondent's mere conclusory denial of receipt of service was insufficient to rebut the presumption that service was proper (see Grinshpun v Borokhovich, 100 AD3d 551, 552 [2012], lv denied 21 NY3d 857
[2013]).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT. [*2]
Decision Date: November 20, 2013