From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

76 S. Cent. Assocs., LLC v. Dep't of Assessment

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Jan 10, 2018
157 A.D.3d 666 (N.Y. App. Div. 2018)

Opinion

2016–00005 Index No. 403060/15

01-10-2018

In the Matter of 76 SOUTH CENTRAL ASSOCIATES, LLC, respondent, v. DEPARTMENT OF ASSESSMENT, et al., appellants.

Jared Kasschau, Acting County Attorney, Mineola, N.Y. (Christi Marie Kunzig and Robert F. Van der Waag of counsel), for appellants. The Gottlieb Law Firm, PLLC, Syosset, N.Y. (Jonathan D. Gottlieb of counsel), for respondent.


Jared Kasschau, Acting County Attorney, Mineola, N.Y. (Christi Marie Kunzig and Robert F. Van der Waag of counsel), for appellants.

The Gottlieb Law Firm, PLLC, Syosset, N.Y. (Jonathan D. Gottlieb of counsel), for respondent.

WILLIAM F. MASTRO, J.P., JEFFREY A. COHEN, HECTOR D. LASALLE, VALERIE BRATHWAITE NELSON, JJ.

DECISION & ORDER In a tax certiorari proceeding pursuant to Real Property Tax Law article 7, the Department of Assessment, the Assessment Review Commission, and the County of Nassau appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Marano, J.), dated November 30, 2015, which granted the petitioner's motion pursuant to CPLR 306–b to extend the time to complete service of process.

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in granting, in the interest of justice, the petitioner's motion pursuant to CPLR 306–b to extend the time to complete service of process on the appellants (see Leader v. Maroney, Ponzini & Spencer, 97 N.Y.2d 95, 105–106, 736 N.Y.S.2d 291, 761 N.E.2d 1018 ; Rosenzweig v. 600 N. St., LLC, 35 A.D.3d 705, 706, 826 N.Y.S.2d 680 ). The petitioner's time to effect service of process was properly extended since the verified petition demonstrated the merits of the proceeding, the petition was timely filed, the statute of limitations had expired by the time the petitioner moved to extend its time to complete service of process, and there was no demonstrable prejudice to the appellants which would militate against granting the extension of time to serve them (see CPLR 105[u] ; Leader v. Maroney, Ponzini & Spencer, 97 N.Y.2d at 105–106, 736 N.Y.S.2d 291, 761 N.E.2d 1018 ; Gabbar v. Flatlands Commons, LLC, 150 A.D.3d 1084, 1084–1085, 55 N.Y.S.3d 353 ; Abu–Aqlein v. El–Jamal, 44 A.D.3d 884, 885, 844 N.Y.S.2d 385 ; Beauge v. New York City Tr. Auth., 282 A.D.2d 416, 722 N.Y.S.2d 402 ; Busler v. Corbett, 259 A.D.2d 13, 696 N.Y.S.2d 615 ; cf. Bahadur v. New York State Dept. of Correctional Servs., 88 A.D.3d 629, 630, 930 N.Y.S.2d 631 ).

MASTRO, J.P., COHEN, LASALLE and BRATHWAITE NELSON, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

76 S. Cent. Assocs., LLC v. Dep't of Assessment

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Jan 10, 2018
157 A.D.3d 666 (N.Y. App. Div. 2018)
Case details for

76 S. Cent. Assocs., LLC v. Dep't of Assessment

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of 76 SOUTH CENTRAL ASSOCIATES, LLC, respondent, v…

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.

Date published: Jan 10, 2018

Citations

157 A.D.3d 666 (N.Y. App. Div. 2018)
66 N.Y.S.3d 620

Citing Cases

Silva v. Kings Cnty. Pub. Adm'r

Moreover, Defendant Ahad makes no showing of prejudice other than a conclusory assertion. See 76 S. Cent.…

Oliva v. The Long Island R.R. Co.

Here, applying an interest of justice analysis, under the facts presented, Plaintiffs application is Granted.…