From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Rivera v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Mar 19, 2002
292 A.D.2d 246 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)

Opinion

320N

March 19, 2002.

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Douglas McKeon, J.), entered November 1, 2000, which denied plaintiff's motion to restore the matter to the court's active calendar and to permit him to file a Note of Issue, unanimously reversed, on the law, the facts, and in the exercise of discretion, without costs, and the motion granted.

GEORGE T. DELANEY, for plaintiff-appellant.

JULIAN L. KALKSTEIN, for defendant-respondent.

Before: Nardelli, J.P., Saxe, Sullivan, Wallach, Friedman, JJ.


Inasmuch as plaintiff never served and filed a note of issue, CPLR 3404 was inapplicable as a basis to dismiss the complaint (see, Johnson v. Minskoff Sons, Inc., 287 A.D.2d 233, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12361; see also, Jiles v. NYCTA, 290 A.D.2d 307, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 309). Counsel's erroneous notification to the court, in August 1998, that the case had been settled, was the only reason the matter was removed from the court's list of active cases. Such circumstances can have caused neither prejudice to defendant, since its own files would clearly reflect the state of the litigation, nor any other appropriate basis for a denial of the motion to restore. In light of the strong public policy of allowing cases to be decided on their merits (see, Silverio v. City of New York, 266 A.D.2d 129), it was improvident to deny plaintiff's motion.

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.


Summaries of

Rivera v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Mar 19, 2002
292 A.D.2d 246 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
Case details for

Rivera v. City of New York

Case Details

Full title:ROBERTO RIVERA, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, v. THE CITY OF NEW YORK…

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

Date published: Mar 19, 2002

Citations

292 A.D.2d 246 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
738 N.Y.S.2d 839

Citing Cases

Richardson v. City of New York

The motion court adopted the City's line of reasoning, observing that plaintiffs offered no explanation of…

Morton v. Mulgrew

Second, it is the longstanding preference, and strong public policy, in New York, that cases be decided on…