Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
Contrary to the defendants' contentions, the plaintiff satisfied its evidentiary burden at the hearing to determine the propriety of service of process ( see, Meagher v. ARA Serv., 242 A.D.2d 286; Wern v. D'Alessandro, 219 A.D.2d 646) and established that jurisdiction was properly acquired over the defendants. The credible testimony of the process server demonstrated that service had been made upon the defendant Millicent R. Mahood, at her home, within minutes after the conceded service personally made upon the defendant Willard S. Mahood ( see, Miller v. Irwin, 202 A.D.2d 344). While the defendants offered conclusory testimony that the defendant Millicent R. Mahood was not served, this conflicting evidence raised a credibility issue. The hearing court's credibility determination is entitled to great weight on appeal ( see, Miale v. Miale, 258 A.D.2d 444; Federal Natl. Mtge. Assn. v. Roth, 240 A.D.2d 466). Since it is amply supported by the record, it will not be disturbed ( see, Avco Mtge. Co. v. Ward, 255 A.D.2d 347; Leonard v. Grimes, 246 A.D.2d 630; Key Bank USA v. Klein, 243 A.D.2d 688).
The defendants' remaining contentions are without merit.
Altman, J. P., Friedmann, McGinity and Luciano, JJ., concur.