From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Mannino v. Huntington Hilton Hotel

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 25, 2002
295 A.D.2d 577 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)

Opinion

2001-08342

Submitted May 29, 2002.

June 25, 2002.

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Doyle, J.), dated August 1, 2001, which denied his motion pursuant to CPLR 3404 to restore the action to the trial calendar.

Phillips, Weiner Quinn, Lindenhurst, N.Y. (James McDonaugh of counsel), for appellant.

Before: A. GAIL PRUDENTI, P.J., CORNELIUS J. O'BRIEN, LEO F. McGINITY, STEPHEN G. CRANE, JJ.


ORDERED that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, and the motion is granted.

A plaintiff seeking restoration of an action within one year of it being marked off the trial calendar need not demonstrate a reasonable excuse, a meritorious action, lack of intent to abandon, and a lack of prejudice to the defendants (see Basetti v. Nour, 287 A.D.2d 126, 133). Thus, the Supreme Court erred in denying the plaintiff's motion to restore the action, since it was made within one year after the action was marked off the calendar (see Polvino v. Island Group Admin., 289 A.D.2d 315, 316).

PRUDENTI, P.J., O'BRIEN, McGINITY and CRANE, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Mannino v. Huntington Hilton Hotel

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 25, 2002
295 A.D.2d 577 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
Case details for

Mannino v. Huntington Hilton Hotel

Case Details

Full title:JOHN MANNINO, appellant, v. HUNTINGTON HILTON HOTEL, et al., respondents

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

Date published: Jun 25, 2002

Citations

295 A.D.2d 577 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
744 N.Y.S.2d 705

Citing Cases

Newsome v. Akins

CPLR 3404 allowed the plaintiffs one year to move to restore the action to the trial calendar and that period…

Maragos v. Getty Petroleum Corp.

The Supreme Court denied the motion, finding that the plaintiffs failed to provide a reasonable excuse for…