From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Rosario v. D.R. Kenyon Son, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Feb 2, 1999
258 A.D.2d 265 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)

Summary

denying late motion for failure to show "good cause"

Summary of this case from Cabrera v. New York City Transit Auth.

Opinion

February 2, 1999

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Bronx County (Bertram Katz, J.).


The motion court properly denied defendant Kenyon's cross motion for summary judgment as untimely since it was not served within the, time frame set by the court pursuant to CPLR 3212 (a) and because Kenyon failed to demonstrate good cause for consideration of the late cross motion. Questions of fact as to the work proximately causing plaintiffs injuries warranted denial of summary judgment in favor of any of the manufacturers or repairers ( see, Bral v. City of New York, 221 A.D.2d 283). All of the successor corporation issues were properly resolved ( see, Sweatland v. Park corp., 181 A.D.2d 243, 245-246). We have considered appellants' remaining arguments and find them to be unavailing.

Concur — Ellerin, J. P., Williams, Wallach and Tom, JJ.


Summaries of

Rosario v. D.R. Kenyon Son, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Feb 2, 1999
258 A.D.2d 265 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)

denying late motion for failure to show "good cause"

Summary of this case from Cabrera v. New York City Transit Auth.
Case details for

Rosario v. D.R. Kenyon Son, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:ELIZER ROSARIO, Respondent, v. D.R. KENYON SON, INC., et al., Appellants…

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

Date published: Feb 2, 1999

Citations

258 A.D.2d 265 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)
685 N.Y.S.2d 38

Citing Cases

Siegel v. Siler

Hence, a timely summary judgment motion and cross motion permit consideration of an untimely cross motion…

Siegel v. Siler

Hence, a timely summary judgment motion and cross-motion permits consideration of an untimely cross-motion,…