Landau v. Fleet Call, Inc.

Full title: ERIC LANDAU, Respondent, v. FLEET CALL, INC., et al., Appellants

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

Date published: Dec 20, 1994

210 A.D.2d 156 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)

621 N.Y.S.2d 853

Opinion

December 20, 1994

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Myriam Altman, J.).

We find that plaintiff's attorney's failure to serve a timely answer to defendants' counterclaims was due to his mistaken belief that a reply had already been served, that the brief delay caused defendants no prejudice, and that the affidavit of plaintiff's attorney was adequate for purposes of showing a meritorious defense (see, Epstein v Lenox Hill Hosp., 108 A.D.2d 616, 617, amended 114 A.D.2d 824; Mufalli v Ford Motor Co., 105 A.D.2d 642, 643-644). Accordingly, it was a proper exercise of discretion to extend plaintiff's time to serve a reply (CPLR 3012 [d]).

Concur — Ellerin, J.P., Ross, Rubin, Nardelli and Williams, JJ.