Ordered that the orders are affirmed, with one bill of costs.
We have recently held that the newly-amended CPLR 306-b, which became effective on January 1, 1998 (L 1997, ch 476, § 2), may not be applied retroactively (see, Connor v. Deas, 255 A.D.2d 287; accord, Floyd v. Salamon Bros., 249 A.D.2d 139). Accordingly, the Supreme Court's reliance upon a retroactive application of the statute to sustain the instant petitions was error.
Nevertheless, the orders must be affirmed. Contrary to the appellants' contentions, the petitioners established compliance with the proof of service requirements imposed under former CPLR 306-b (a). The record demonstrates that the petitioners timely filed with the County Clerk duplicate copies of their notices of petition and petitions, which had been date-stamped "received" by the entities on which service had been made. Under the circumstances, the written admissions of receipt filed by the petitioners constituted adequate proof of service within the meaning of CPLR 306 (e) (cf., Sullivan v. Murray, 145 A.D.2d 826; see also, Matter of Goshen Shopping Assocs. v. Assessor[s] of Town of Goshen, 260 A.D.2d 481 [decided herewith]).
The appellants' remaining contentions are without merit.
Bracken, J. P., Thompson, Altman and Krausman, JJ., concur.