Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
After service was made upon a person of suitable age and discretion at the office of the defendant dentist, process was purportedly mailed to the office. However, since it was mailed to an incorrect and incomplete address, and CPLR 308 (2) is to be strictly construed (Macchia v. Russo, 67 N.Y.2d 592), the complaint was properly dismissed for improper service of process (see, Schurr v. Fillebrown, 146 A.D.2d 623; cf., Brownell v Feingold, 82 A.D.2d 844). Bracken, J.P., Harwood, Balletta and Copertino, JJ., concur.