
    James P. Di Pietro, Respondent, v. McAllister Bros., Inc., Appellant. James P. Di Pietro, Respondent, v. McAllister Lighterage Line, Inc., Appellant.
    Supreme Court, Appellate Term, Second Department,
    July 14, 1965.
    
      Purdy, Lamb & Catoggio (Gerald M. McAllister and Vincent A. Catoggio of counsel), for McAllister Bros., Inc., appellant. Gerald M. McAllister and Vincent A. Catoggio for McAllister Lighterage Line, Inc., appellant. Fodera & Galardi (Jack H. Dorfman of counsel), for respondent.
   Per Curiam.

The order should be unanimously reversed, with $10 costs to defendant, and motion to correct pleadings by substituting McAllister Lighterage Line, Inc., as defendant in place of McAllister Bros., Inc., mine pro tunc, denied. The court was without power to make such order. (Abrams v. General Financial Corp., 274 App. Div. 756.) Plaintiff’s original designation of McAllister Bros., Inc., as defendant may not be regarded as a mere misnomer. The substitution of one defendant for another by order, without provision for service of process on the new defendant, is not sanctioned by CPLR 2001, which continues section 105 of the Civil Practice Act essentially unchanged.

Concur — Di Giovanna, Gulotta and Brenner, JJ.

Order reversed, etc.  