Alternative Process Service in New York: What Happens Next

In New York, courts may authorize alternative process service when traditional methods are impracticable. Under CPLR §308(5), a plaintiff may request court permission to serve documents through other means, such as certified mail, posting, or electronic communication. The court’s order defines the method and timeline for completion. Undisputed Legal ensures every aspect of Alternative Process Service in New York complies with statutory and procedural requirements.

Quick Reference

• Governed by CPLR §308(5).
• Used when personal service is impracticable.
• Requires court motion and judicial approval.
• Court specifies method, location, and time limits.
• Proof of service affidavit must be filed promptly.

When a defendant refuses or evades delivery of legal papers, the court may authorize Alternative Process Service in New York under CPLR §308(5). This form of service allows for delivery by methods other than personal service—such as email, social media, publication, or other court-approved means. Undisputed Legal explains what happens next, how courts determine when alternative service is appropriate, and why proper documentation and compliance are essential to ensure that service remains legally valid.

If a defendant in New York avoids being served with papers by refusing to accept them, or being otherwise unreachable, the lawsuit can be put on hold because the court does not have personal jurisdiction until the papers are properly served. A way to circumvent this is alternative service. CPLR Section 308 says that plaintiffs must try one of the usual ways of serving papers (personal delivery, substituted service, or ‘nail and mail’) before they can use other methods. 

• If the defendant’s evasion makes standard service impossible, plaintiffs can file a motion to ask the court for ‘alternative service’ in a way that is likely to give notice. 
• It’s very important to keep accurate records of attempts, refusals, addresses, times, and places. If plaintiffs do not serve the papers within the time limit set by law (usually 120 days under CPLR Section 306-b) or do not show that they did, their case may be thrown out or they will not be able to get a default judgement. 
• The court must have personal jurisdiction over the defendant before a lawsuit can move forward in a meaningful way. Defendants may decline or evade service as a strategic delay; however, mere refusal does not inherently invalidate service if the server adhered to prescribed procedures.
• If service fails because the defendant is trying to avoid it, the plaintiff can file a motion under Section 308(5) asking for a different method, like email, publication, or mailing plus other steps. However, the plaintiff must back up the motion with affidavits showing that the method is not possible and suggest a method that is likely to give notice. 
• A plaintiff must show that they tried to serve the defendant in good faith (in most cases) or that it is impossible to serve them because they are avoiding service. This is something that courts look at in different ways. 
• Deadlines for responding, default judgements, or the statute of limitations could be affected if service is late or not done correctly.

 

PROFESSIONAL CREDENTIALS & MEMBERSHIPS

Frequently Asked Questions About Alternative Process Service in New York

1. What happens if the defendant keeps refusing to accept legal papers?
   Plaintiffs do not automatically stop the case if the defendant refuses papers. Plaintiffs can go ahead if the server can find the defendant (or someone else at their home or business) and they use one of the approved service methods and file proof of service. Refusing service alone does not make it void.
2. How many times do I have to try before I can ask for alternative service as a plaintiff?
   You need to keep track of several attempts (times, addresses, and methods) and show that using the usual methods of service was impossible or blocked by evasion. 
3. What is meant by ‘alternative service’?
   Once standard methods are not possible, the court may order service ‘in such manner as the court… directs’ under Section 308(5). This can be done by email, publication, mailing to the last known address, or any other manner that is likely to allow reasonable notice is provided. 
4. Can the plaintiff get a default judgement while they are still trying to serve the other party?
   The plaintiff can only ask for a default judgement after the service is done and the time to respond has passed. A default can be challenged if the service wasn’t done right (or the service period hasn’t started because the service hasn’t been done).
5. What happens to the plaintiff’s timeline or the defendant’s deadlines when they refuse service?
   If the defendant avoids or refuses service, it could shorten the time left for discovery, responses, or default motions. Once service is valid, the plaintiff should act quickly to move the case forward.
6. What happens if the defendant later says they weren’t served at all?
   If the service was done in a different way, the defendant can contest it, but the plaintiff’s well-documented attempts and motion under Section 308(5) will be very important. 
7. Do you have to use a private process-serving agency for defendants who are trying to avoid you?
   Not necessarily but private process service agencies like Undisputed Legal can help since they know how to do skip tracing, find evasive defendants, keep detailed logs, use GPS/time stamps, and gather the paperwork needed to show due diligence and support a Section 308(5) motion.
8. If the defendant avoids the lawsuit, does that mean they do not have to respond?
   No. Not serving someone does not protect them. Once service is properly done (even if it’s done in a different way), the defendant has to respond or risk getting a default judgement.
9. What should the plaintiff do if they think the defendant is avoiding service?
   Keep track of all the times the process server tried to serve the defendant (including the times, places, and witnesses). Get the last known address, business or employment information, and skip-trace data. If normal methods do not work or the party does not know where the defendant is, the plaintiff should then prepare a motion under Section 308(5) with detailed affidavits and suggest a different way to serve them in a timely manner.

Trusted Legal References for Process Service

Undisputed Legal Inc. – Nationwide & International Process Service
Provides efficient, court-compliant process service throughout all 50 U.S. states and in over 120 countries, ensuring legal accuracy under the Hague Service Convention and related international protocols.
Phone Number: 212-203-8001

U.S. Courts – Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (Rule 4: Service of Process)
Outlines the federal standards for serving process in civil actions, including who may serve, valid delivery methods, and proper documentation of service.
Phone Number: 202-502-2600

U.S. Department of Justice – Service of Process Abroad
Explains federal procedures for serving judicial and extrajudicial documents internationally, including the Hague Service Convention and Letters Rogatory for non-member countries.
Phone Number: 202-514-2000

Hague Conference on Private International Law – Service Convention (1965)
Creates an internationally recognized framework for cross-border service of judicial and extrajudicial documents, ensuring consistency and cooperation among treaty nations.

---

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES: ALTERNATIVE PROCESS SERVICE IN NEW YORK

The following resources explain the legal standards governing alternative service of process when personal and substituted service are unsuccessful or impracticable. New York courts require strict proof of due diligence before authorizing alternative methods, and improperly used alternatives frequently result in vacated judgments or dismissal. These materials clarify when alternative service may be permitted, what documentation courts expect, and how judges evaluate motions seeking court authorization. Together, they provide a court-recognized framework for pursuing alternative service while preserving jurisdiction.

---

FOUNDATIONAL NEW YORK SERVICE RULES

• New York Process Service
• Serving Legal Papers in New York: Laws, Deadlines, & Practices
• What Is Service of Process in New York? What You Need To Know
• New York Process Serving Laws: Common Questions Answered

---

DUE DILIGENCE & FAILED SERVICE ATTEMPTS

• Avoiding Mistakes In Serving Legal Papers in New York
• How To Locate And Serve Someone Avoiding Service in New York
• Evasion vs. Refusal of Process Service In New York
• What If Someone Refuses Service of Process In New York?

---

SUBSTITUTED & CONSTRUCTIVE SERVICE METHODS

• The Difference Between Personal Service vs. Substituted Service
• What is “Nail and Mail” Service in New York?
• Nail-And-Mail Process Service in New York: Refusal & Defenses
• Understanding “Constructive Service” and When It Applies

---

COURT AUTHORIZATION & JUDICIAL APPROVAL

• Court Order Process Service By Publication In New York
• When Email or Social Media Service Might Be Allowed In New York
• Process Service By Acknowledgement (CPLR 312-A) In New York

---

PROOF REQUIREMENTS & COURT SCRUTINY

• Requirements For Affidavits of Service in New York Courts
• How Affidavits and GPS Logs Protect New York Judgments
• Improper Service Of Process In New York: Penalties & Solutions

---

WHEN ALTERNATIVE SERVICE IS CHALLENGED

• Challenging Improper Process Service In New York – Vacating Default Judgments and Re-Service
• What Are The Steps If Service Of Process Fails?
• Refusal Of Process Service In New York: Can It Prevent Default?

---

RELATED HIGH-RISK SERVICE SCENARIOS

• How To Serve Legal Papers Without a Physical Address
• How To Serve Legal Papers on A Homeless Defendant In New York
• How To Serve Legal Papers on A Deceased Defendant in New York

---

The lawsuit grinds to a standstill if the defendant evades service of process. Court dates are postponed, deadlines are rescheduled, and the case can be delayed. Consequently, alternative process service requirements are often required after traditional means of process has failed. A private process service agency like Undisputed Legal can help you find evasive defendants and help serve process, even in cases where process service is refused. 

A lawsuit cannot commence until the defendant is duly served. If the court does not acquire jurisdiction, then no amount of evidence will be considered Avoiding service is a common tactic among defendants who want to delay or even stop the litigation altogether. 

In order to find and serve defendants, our Undisputed Legal process servers undergo extensive training. newspaper are all examples of alternative service that a court may permit. Judges, however, are not quick to greenlight such strategies. The plaintiff must demonstrate that you have consistently and seriously attempted to serve the defendant via the specified channels. Alternative ways are more likely to be permitted if process servers like those at Undisputed Legal record each service attempt, along with the time and place. Multiple attempts at various hours, address confirmation, and dependable reports from process servers are all signs that the due diligence requirement has been accomplished, which judges look for.

What happens in a situation with an evasive defendant

The right to due process states that before a person may be brought to court, they must be notified of any legal actions against them and given a copy of the complaint. Defendants  may attempt to take advantage of this by evading service or hiding their whereabouts. It becomes more difficult for the party that has initiated legal action when the defendant refuses to be served promptly. If the defendant avoids service at their residence, servers have the option to serve them at their place of employment or another public location. 

In New York, a process server may use certified mail to serve legal documents instead of physically delivering them. The complaint and court summonses might be forwarded to the defendant’s last known address, sometimes called their forwarding address, if the server is able to locate it. A legally capable adult must be present upon delivery to sign for the documents.

Alternative process service Options 

After many unsuccessful efforts to physically serve process on the defendant listed in a lawsuit, substituted service of process is often used. Using this method, the process server may leave the sub-servable papers with an adult, such as a housemate, a manager, or someone who seems to have authority at the defendant’s place of employment or regular mailing address. A Commercial Mail Receiving Agency (CMRA) often will suffice in place of a US Post Office Box.

Even when the plaintiff has taken all necessary precautions, they are nonetheless unable to serve the defendant by personal delivery or by designating an appropriate adult to accept the papers. The plaintiff can then follow the steps outlined in CPLR 308 to serve the defendant by first attaching the summons to the door of their ‘actual place of business, dwelling place or usual place of abode’ and then mailing a copy to their ‘last known residence’ or ‘actual place of business’.

When the process server tries to deliver the documents and the defendant (or occupant) refuses to accept them, that is called ‘refusal of service.’ Refusal does not automatically make service invalid if it was done correctly, but it often will require the court to question whether the plaintiff has made enough efforts and whether standard methods are still possible.

Motion for Alternative Service in New York

A defendant’s refusal might be the basis for a plaintiff’s motion under Section 308(5). A plaintiff will show the court the record of failed service, the defendant’s refusal or avoidance, and argue that traditional delivery is no longer possible. They will then ask the court to use its discretion to come up with a different way to serve the defendant. 

In this case, the defendant’s refusal puts the onus on the plaintiff to show that it is impractical to serve them (instead of strict due diligence as required by Section 308(4)). If the court allows alternative service, it means that the defendant’s actions have made normal service impractical, and that fairness and notice call for a creative solution. The refusal is now part of the case for alternate service instead of being a separate concern.

After an alternative service is ordered, the service must be effective, have deadlines, and not be at risk of default. The plaintiff must carry out service as directed by the court and then file proof of service after the court grants an alternative service order. At this point, the case moves on to the next stage. The defendant is now considered to have been properly served (assuming they follow the rules), and the defendant has time to respond.

Since the defendant refused service, the alternative service may have a shorter time frame for response or may not have some of the protections that the defendant would have had if they had accepted service. In effect, the defendant’s refusal speeds up the timeline for the lawsuit.

Filing of a motion for Default Judgment

The plaintiff can also file a motion for default judgement under CPLR Section 3215 if the defendant does not respond. This is the same default mechanism that is used in most cases. The plaintiff can use the earlier refusal as proof that the defendant was trying to avoid them and to counter later claims that they didn’t get the notice. The defendant’s refusal strategy could lead to default.

But the fact that the defendant said no may make their claim of lack of notice less strong. If the alternative service followed the court’s order and the defendant had previously refused service, the courts might find the notice sufficient and refuse to vacate service or a resulting default judgement under CPLR Section 5015(a)(4) due to lack of jurisdiction. So, if the defendant refuses, it could tip the scales in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendant when it comes to service validity.

While making their decisions on these motions, some courts have made it mandatory for plaintiffs to serve the defendant’s attorney, insurance firm, or family member with the summons and complaint; some have even permitted service by email. Every scenario has its own unique set of conditions. Nevertheless, a plaintiff may think about filing a petition under CPLR 308 if serving a defendant is becoming problematic, maybe due to the defendant’s efforts to avoid service). This is crucial because within 120 days of starting the action, the summons and complaint must be served. 

Demonstrating due diligence

A plaintiff must demonstrate reasonable diligence in attempting service in order to establish good cause. When a plaintiff does not make an attempt at service or fails to make even a moderately diligent effort at service, there will be no good cause.. According to the judgement in  Bumpus, ‘If good cause for an extension is not established, courts must consider the ‘interest of justice’ standard of CPLR 306-b.’ In order for a court to meet the ‘interest of justice’ requirement, it must ‘carefully’ examine the factual context of the case and balance the opposing interests offered by the parties.  However, the court may take the plaintiff’s attempts to serve the defendant into account.

After two attempts at either personal or substituted service at different times during the day, ‘nail and mail’ is used. A standard copy and a registered or certified copy are sent out by the server, while one copy is posted in a conspicuous location, such the door. Dates of the two attempts, posting, and subsequent mailings must be included in the affidavit.

Due to its directness and verified handoff of information, personal service is often the preferred way of notification. Having said that, there are cases when a fair amount of time and efforts are insufficient to complete the delivery. Depending on the nature of the case, courts provide several means for plaintiffs and their lawyers to notify defendants who are difficult to physically serve. Alternative service of process is the umbrella term for several techniques.

Prior efforts at serving must frequently meet certain conditions if a state permits alternative service of process. The number of legitimate efforts to deliver papers to an address without success is a common emphasis of these criteria, albeit they do differ.. To make sure the service is fully compliant and cannot be invalidated, it is vital to be particular and investigate what certifies the first efforts at a court level. The lawsuit may be dismissed or the legal procedure may have to start again if the process was improperly or invalidly served.

Requirements of alternative service in New York

Judgement on the use of alternative service methods or completion of diligence requirements do not conclude the procedure. The individual responsible for publishing, mailing, distributing, or posting the papers must nonetheless fulfil obligations related to other service methods. The official delivery date for papers is often affected by these mailings, which often need certified mail.

The procedure cannot be finalised until the necessary paperwork, such as affidavits or declarations of service, detailing the completion of the service, is completed. In these papers, the party executing service of process attests to the accomplishment of alternative service and how service was executed as given forth by the appropriate court’s rules. Our Undisputed Legal private process servers pay close attention to how this impacts legal timelines while also making sure they follow all relevant court regulations regarding qualifying for and perfecting service. 

This means that if the defendant refuses, avoids, or cannot be reached, or if the plaintiff cannot reasonably serve the defendant by the methods listed, the plaintiff can ask for an order under Section 308(5) for alternative service (also called substituted or court-ordered service). Subsequently, the selected method of service must be ‘reasonably calculated under all the circumstances to apprise the defendant of the action’ (a due process standard).  When the defendant refuses service, the situation changes: refusal often gives the court the reason to find that conventional service is impossible (or evaded), which then gives the court the power to act under Section 308(5). Once granted, the lawsuit can go on as if service has been properly done. 

How this affects the defendant’s deadline to respond

Once service is completed, whether by traditional or alternative means, the defendant must respond (for example, by answering the complaint or showing up) within the time frame set by the court and the type of case. If the proof shows that the court-ordered method was followed, the defendant cannot now say, ‘I was never served.’ If the defendant does not respond in the time given, the plaintiff can then ask for a default under CPLR Section 3215.

If the defendant does not show up after being served in a different way, the plaintiff can go ahead and get a default judgement (as long as other requirements are met, like proof of claim, affidavits, etc.). The plaintiff will use the proof of alternative service to show that the court has personal jurisdiction and that the notice was effective.

If the defendant first refused service (or avoided service) and a motion for alternative service was granted, that refusal is now part of the service record. From the plaintiff’s point of view, the refusal helps show that standard methods did not work or were made impossible by the defendant’s actions, which is why the court found in favour of the plaintiff under Section 308(5). The courts have said, for example, that ‘when a defendant intentionally evades or resists service, alternative methods may be authorised.’

From the defendant’s point of view, the refusal could make it harder to challenge the service later on. If the plaintiff followed the instructions for the alternative method and the defendant had refused earlier, the defendant’s claim of lack of notice might not be as strong. In other words, once alternative service is done correctly, the defendant cannot avoid the consequences by refusing. The case moves on to the next stage.

Does a refusal to accept service mean that the defendant does not have a right to challenge service?

Even after alternative service, the defendant still has the right to challenge the service or the jurisdiction. Often, the defendant may file a motion to vacate a judgement (if one has been entered) under CPLR Section 5015(a)(4) for lack of personal jurisdiction, or they may file a motion to dismiss under Section 3211(a)(8) for defective service. In these kinds of challenges, the record will focus on whether the alternative method was carried out exactly as the court said it should be and whether the notice was reasonable given the situation.

The defendant may contend that the alternative method was inadequate, not reasonably designed to reach them, or that the court’s order was procedurally flawed. For instance, if the plaintiff failed to adequately demonstrate that conventional methods were impracticable, this can call into question the process service. 

When a defendant refuses service and the court allows alternative service, the strategic position of both parties changes a lot. For the plaintiff, refusal gives them a reason to use alternative service, speeds up the service strategy, and lets them move on once service is completed instead of waiting. For the defendant, refusing service is a double-edged sword: it delays the start of the service, but it may also shorten the time they have to prepare their defence once the service is done, which could hurt their credibility or position when they challenge the service later.

In cases of refusal or evasion, the plaintiff is not required to demonstrate exhaustive attempts but must instead show efforts and justification for employing an alternative method. When a defendant is hiding or refuses, courts have said that the motion for alternative service can go forward with less strict proof of previous attempts.

If the defendant does not respond after the plaintiff has properly served them with alternative service, the plaintiff can procure a default judgment. The plaintiff must make sure that proof of service is filed on time, that any extra notice requirements (like those for corporations) are met, and that the default motion is filed on time. N. Once the order is granted and service is completed, the defendant’s defence that they were not served is much weaker, especially if there is proof of refusal. We at Undisputed Legal are here to ensure that default judgments are unlikely. We make sure that your papers are served, even if the individual is evasive.

Best Practices for Alternative Process Service in New York

Because Alternative Process Service in New York occurs only by court order, precision and compliance are critical. The following practices ensure the process is valid and defensible in court:

• File a Motion Under CPLR §308(5):
  Demonstrate that traditional methods—personal, substitute, or “nail and mail”—were attempted and proved impracticable.
• Provide Evidence of Diligent Efforts:
  Include detailed logs, GPS timestamps, and witness statements documenting every prior attempt at service.
• Propose a Practical Alternative:
  Suggest an alternative method that reasonably ensures the defendant will receive notice—such as email, certified mail, or posting.
• Comply Strictly with the Court Order:
  Follow the court’s directive exactly; unauthorized deviations can invalidate service.
• Document Every Step:
  Maintain detailed affidavits and supporting records to withstand any jurisdictional challenge.

Following these best practices ensures that your Alternative Process Service in New York is not only court-approved but also legally unassailable.

Case Studies: When Alternative Process Service Works

Case Study 1 – Email and Publication Service

In a civil action where the defendant had moved abroad without leaving a forwarding address, Undisputed Legal helped the plaintiff file a motion under CPLR §308(5). The court authorized email and publication in a local newspaper as alternative service. The defendant later acknowledged receipt, and the court upheld the validity of the service.

Case Study 2 – Social Media Notification

In a family law dispute, a defendant repeatedly refused in-person service. Undisputed Legal prepared evidence of multiple failed attempts and petitioned for electronic service. The court approved Facebook Messenger delivery alongside email, both of which satisfied CPLR §308(5). The action proceeded without delay.

These examples demonstrate how Alternative Process Service in New York can provide effective, court-compliant solutions when defendants avoid or refuse service.

Why Choose Undisputed Legal

When standard service methods fail, Undisputed Legal offers unmatched expertise in handling Alternative Process Service in New York. Our licensed process servers and legal team are experienced in preparing and executing court-approved service under CPLR §308(5).

Clients choose Undisputed Legal because:

• We are licensed, bonded, and fully compliant with New York regulations.
• We prepare court-ready affidavits for alternative and substituted service.
• Every attempt is GPS-tracked, timestamped, and verified.
• Our team coordinates directly with attorneys and court clerks for motion support.
• We specialize in refused, evasive, and international service cases.

Whether your challenge involves a missing defendant or a refusal to accept papers, Undisputed Legal ensures your service meets every procedural standard.

Conclusion

Alternative Process Service in New York is a vital legal tool when traditional service fails. By securing court approval and documenting every step, plaintiffs can preserve jurisdiction and move forward confidently.

Courts demand accuracy, diligence, and adherence to their orders—qualities that define Undisputed Legal’s approach. Our team’s expertise ensures each service, whether by email, publication, or other approved means, remains fully compliant and enforceable.

When traditional service methods fail, Undisputed Legal provides the clarity and reliability you need to move forward.

Order Process Service Today

If your defendant has refused service or cannot be located, it’s time to request Alternative Process Service in New Yorkwith professional support. Undisputed Legal will handle every step—from motion documentation to final proof of service—ensuring full compliance with CPLR §308(5).

Our servers are trained to deliver fast, accurate, and court-verified results.
Call (800) 774-6922 or visit UndisputedLegal.com today to order process service and protect your case from procedural delays.

WHAT OUR CLIENTS ARE SAYING

FOR ASSISTANCE SERVING LEGAL PAPERS IN NEW YORK

Click the “Place Order” button at the top of this page or call us at (800) 774-6922 to begin. Our team of experienced process servers is ready to assist you with reliable and efficient service of your documents, ensuring compliance with all legal requirements. We offer both comprehensive support and à la carte services tailored to your specific needs:

• Prompt and professional service of process
• Accurate completion of affidavits of service
• Rush service for time-sensitive matters
• Skip tracing for hard-to-locate parties
• Detailed reporting on service attempts

Don’t risk case delays or dismissals due to improper service. Let Undisputed Legal’s skilled team handle the important task of serving legal papers for you. Our diligent, professional service helps attorneys, pro se litigants, and parents ensure their papers are served correctly and on time.

Take the first step towards ensuring proper service in your case – click “Place Order” or call (800) 774-6922 now. Let Undisputed Legal be your trusted partner in navigating the critical process of serving your documents.

“Quality is never an accident; it is always the result of high intention, sincere effort, intelligent direction, and skillful execution; it represents the wise choice of many alternatives” – Foster, William A

Sources

¹ USPS.com FAQs. (n.d.). https://faq.usps.com/s/article/Commercial-Mail-Receiving-Agency-CMRA

² The procedures that a plaintiff must follow in order to personally serve a defendant in New York are outlined in CPLR 308. The most proper method of service is for the plaintiff to physically deliver the summons to the defendant. CPL Rule 308(1). The plaintiff might then have someone ‘of suitable age and discretion’ serve the summons to the defendant at their ‘actual place of business’ or ‘dwelling place or usual place of abode’ (CPLR 308) (2).

³ Leader v. Maroney, Ponzini & Spencer, 97 N.Y.2d 95 (2001).
A Plaintiff had 120 days to serve process under the previous legislation, and the action would be ‘deemed dismissed’ if service was not made within that period. According to Leader, 97 N.Y.2d at 100 even if the Statute of Limitations had expired, the plaintiff might still initiate a fresh action and serve process within a second 120-day period from the date of the automatic dismissal.

⁴ Civil Procedure Law Report 306-b.

⁵ Bumpus v/s New York 66 A.D.3d 26, 31

⁶ Nationstar Mortgage, LLC v. Wilson, 176 A.D.3d 1087 (2nd Dep’t 2019

⁷ The court in JEAN v. CSENCSITS (2019) Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York. said that the “impracticability standard does not require the applicant to satisfy the more stringent standard of due diligence under CPLR 308(4) nor make an actual showing that service has been attempted pursuant to CPLR 308(1), (2), and (4) (see Matter of Kaila B., 64 A.D.3d at 648, 883 N.Y.S.2d 132;)”

DIRECTIONS TO OUR NEW YORK CITY HEADQUARTERS

For access to our New York City corporate headquarters at One World Trade Center, 85th Floor, please click the embedded map and call ahead to be added to building security. Be sure to bring all necessary documents and payment to expedite your visit. Undisputed Legal Inc. maintains offices in New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, and Washington D.C. We provide legal support services in all 50 states and over 120 countries worldwide.