Alomar v. Manhattan Bronx Surface Transit

Full title: TOMAS G. ALOMAR, Appellant, v. MANHATTAN AND BRONX SURFACE TRANSIT…

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

Date published: Nov 13, 1997

244 A.D.2d 181 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)

664 N.Y.S.2d 37

Opinion

November 13, 1997

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Robert Lippmann, J.).

The court properly granted unconditional preclusion and dismissal where plaintiff failed to offer an adequate excuse for his seven-year delay in providing a bill of particulars, and failed to demonstrate the merits of his claim as against defendant-respondent (see, Canter v. Mulnick, 93 A.D.2d 751, affd 60 N.Y.2d 689). The remedy provided by the court was appropriate under the circumstances (see, CPLR 3042 [former (c)]). We have reviewed plaintiff's remaining arguments and find them to be without merit.

Concur — Murphy, P. J., Rosenberger, Ellerin, Rubin and Tom, JJ.