Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
The Supreme Court properly determined that the plaintiffs were not entitled to the tolling provision of CPLR 203 (b) in the absence of any evidence that the defendant Steven F. Gass was united in interest with the defendant Burt Gass (see, CPLR 203 [b]; Kavanaugh v. Nussbaum, 71 N.Y.2d 535, 547-548; Raschel v Rish, 69 N.Y.2d 694, 697; Kanter v. Schlecker, 64 N.Y.2d 937, 938; Prudential Ins. Co. v. Stone, 270 N.Y. 154; Scheff v. St. John's Episcopal Hosp., 115 A.D.2d 532, 534-535; Connell v. Hayden, 83 A.D.2d 30; Paciello v. Patel, 83 A.D.2d 73). The plaintiffs similarly failed to demonstrate partnership by estoppel (see, Partnership Law § 27), and they were not entitled to the six-month tolling provision of CPLR 205 (a) because the prior action against the defendant Steven F. Gass was terminated for lack of personal jurisdiction (see, Markoff v. South Nassau Community Hosp., 61 N.Y.2d 283). The plaintiffs' remaining contention is barred by the doctrine of res judicata (see, Siegel, N.Y. Prac §§ 446, 447, at 676-678 [2d ed]; see also, County of Nassau v. New York State Pub. Empl. Relations Bd., 151 A.D.2d 168, 185-186). O'Brien, J.P., Ritter, Santucci and Krausman, JJ., concur.