From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Przyjemski v. Surowaniec

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 6, 1995
221 A.D.2d 326 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)

Opinion

November 6, 1995

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Dowd, J.).


Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

In light of the strong policy favoring disposition of actions on the merits and the clear intention of the plaintiffs not to abandon the action, the relatively brief delay on their part in properly responding to the 90-day notice does not warrant the drastic remedy of dismissal, especially where, as here, the defendant cannot show prejudice (see, Conner v Brasserie, Inc., 136 A.D.2d 481; JMS Enters. v Belfield, 114 A.D.2d 886). Balletta, J.P., Rosenblatt, Pizzuto, Joy and Altman, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Przyjemski v. Surowaniec

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 6, 1995
221 A.D.2d 326 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
Case details for

Przyjemski v. Surowaniec

Case Details

Full title:KRYSTYNA PRZYJEMSKI et al., Respondents, v. ZBIGNIEW SUROWANIEC, Appellant

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

Date published: Nov 6, 1995

Citations

221 A.D.2d 326 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
633 N.Y.S.2d 359

Citing Cases

Sanchez v. Serje

ismiss the complaint based upon the plaintiffs' failure to comply with a 90-day demand to file a note of…

Havens v. Flushing Hospital Medical Center

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs. In light of the strong policy…