Defendant, as limited by his brief, appeals 1) from so much of an order of the Civil Court, New York County, dated December 13, 2002 (Paul G. Feinman, J.) as denied his motion to dismiss the complaint, and 2) from an order of the same court and Judge dated April 9, 2003 which denied his motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

PER CURIAM:

Orders dated December 13, 2002 and April 9, 2003 (Paul G. Feinman, J.) modified by remitting the matter to Civil Court for a traverse on the issue of service of the summons and complaint; as modified order affirmed without costs.

A traverse hearing is required to resolve the threshold issue of personal service and to determine the actual circumstances of the process server's delivery of the summons and complaint to defendant's purported "co-worker" (see Ananda Capital Partners, Inc. v Stav Elec. Sys. [1994] Ltd., 301 AD2d 430 [2003]). In the absence of a cross appeal by plaintiff, we have no occasion to address the propriety of the grant of that portion of defendant's initial motion seeking to vacate the default judgment. [*2]

This constitutes the decision and order of the court.