In Ruiz v. New York City Hous. Auth. (216 A.D.2d 258), we denied a motion to dismiss for noncompliance with CPLR 306-a "where plaintiff had served defendant with the summons and complaint in this action under the index number purchased in the prior related and successful proceeding to serve a late notice of claim, [and] the revenue-raising purposes of the statutory scheme were satisfied by plaintiffs eventual purchase of a new index number, and defendant suffered no prejudice".

In Ruiz v. New York City Hous. Auth. (216 A.D.2d 258), we held that a similar motion to dismiss was properly denied "as based on plaintiff's failure to appear for a physical examination, where the date for such examination had been postponed indefinitely and defendant never attempted to secure its right thereto by serving plaintiff with another demand therefor (compare, Best v. City of New York, 97 A.D.2d 389, affd 61 N.Y.2d 847)."