From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Miller v. Rothman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Feb 23, 1987
127 A.D.2d 826 (N.Y. App. Div. 1987)

Opinion

February 23, 1987

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Levitt, J.).


Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The plaintiff has failed to demonstrate that he has a meritorious cause of action, a prerequisite to restoration of an action to the Trial Calendar (CPLR 3404; see, e.g., Sheehan v Hollywood, 112 A.D.2d 211; Monacelli v. Board of Educ., 92 A.D.2d 930). The plaintiff's affidavit merely sets forth the conclusory statement that he has a good and meritorious cause of action. He fails to allege any acts or omissions on the part of the defendant which would constitute malpractice (see, Friedberg v Bay Ridge Orthopedic Assocs., 122 A.D.2d 194; cf., Ford v. Empire Med. Group, 123 A.D.2d 820). We hold, therefore, that Special Term did not abuse its discretion in refusing to grant the plaintiff's motion. Bracken, J.P., Brown, Rubin and Lawrence, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Miller v. Rothman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Feb 23, 1987
127 A.D.2d 826 (N.Y. App. Div. 1987)
Case details for

Miller v. Rothman

Case Details

Full title:ALAN M. MILLER, Appellant, v. JESSEL ROTHMAN, P.C., and/or JESSEL ROTHMAN…

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

Date published: Feb 23, 1987

Citations

127 A.D.2d 826 (N.Y. App. Div. 1987)