From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Atlantic J & S Spiritis Corp. v. Noll's Boat Yard, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jan 28, 2002
290 A.D.2d 525 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)

Opinion

2001-02566

Submitted December 5, 2001.

January 28, 2002.

In an action, inter alia, to set aside certain real property transfers as fraudulent conveyances, the defendants Noll's Boat Yard, Inc., Anthony Pellerito, Alice Pellerito, and Maria Rossiello appeal, and the defendants Henry Noll and Claire Noll separately appeal, from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Winick, J.), entered February 15, 2001, which denied their respective motions pursuant to CPLR 3216 to dismiss the complaint and strike the plaintiffs' note of issue.

Harvey A. Schweiger, Garden City, N.Y., for appellants Noll's Boat Yard, Inc., Anthony Pellerito, Alice Pellerito, and Maria Rossiello.

William T. Stevens, Lido Beach, N.Y., for appellants Henry Noll and Claire Noll.

Charles T. Theofan, Mineola, N.Y., for respondents.

Before: SONDRA MILLER, J.P., CORNELIUS J. O'BRIEN, LEO F. McGINITY, ROBERT W. SCHMIDT, SANDRA L. TOWNES, JJ.


ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with one bill of costs.

The Supreme Court issued an order which constituted a valid 90-day notice pursuant to CPLR 3216 (see, Seletsky v. St. Francis Hosp., 263 A.D.2d 452). Upon the plaintiffs' failure to timely comply with the order or to seek an extension of time within which to comply, the appellants moved to dismiss the complaint and to strike the belatedly-filed note of issue. The plaintiffs were required to demonstrate a reasonable excuse for their noncompliance and a meritorious cause of action (see, Seletsky v. St. Francis Hosp., supra).

The Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in denying the appellants' motions. The court has the discretion to excuse a default resulting from law office failure in appropriate circumstances, particularly where, as here, the plaintiffs demonstrated a meritorious cause of action and that the delay in filing the note of issue did not prejudice the appellants (see, Velasquez v. Newell, 233 A.D.2d 390; Shopwell, Inc. v. Hartz Mtn. Indus., 198 A.D.2d 158; Salch v. Paratore, 100 A.D.2d 845).

S. MILLER, J.P., O'BRIEN, McGINITY, SCHMIDT and TOWNES, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Atlantic J & S Spiritis Corp. v. Noll's Boat Yard, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jan 28, 2002
290 A.D.2d 525 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
Case details for

Atlantic J & S Spiritis Corp. v. Noll's Boat Yard, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:ATLANTIC J S SPIRITIS CORP., ET AL., respondents, v. NOLL'S BOAT YARD…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Jan 28, 2002

Citations

290 A.D.2d 525 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
736 N.Y.S.2d 613

Citing Cases

U.S. Bank, Nat'l Ass'n v. Mizrahi

Since the dismissal order dated November 29, 2012, merely effectuated the September order, which did not meet…