From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Barbera v. DeRostaing

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 31, 1988
140 A.D.2d 660 (N.Y. App. Div. 1988)

Opinion

May 31, 1988

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Burstein, J.).


Ordered that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, with costs, the motion is granted unconditionally, and the complaint is dismissed.

In view of the plaintiffs' failure to provide any reasonable excuse for their extensive delay in serving their bill of particulars, their failure to comply with the court's conditional order of preclusion, and their failure to submit an affidavit of merit, the appellant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint should have been granted unconditionally and the complaint dismissed (see, La Buda v Brookhaven Mem. Hosp. Med. Center, 98 A.D.2d 711, affd 62 N.Y.2d 1014; Bailey v North Shore Univ. Hosp., 91 A.D.2d 967, affd 59 N.Y.2d 748). Mollen, P.J., Mangano, Eiber and Sullivan, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Barbera v. DeRostaing

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 31, 1988
140 A.D.2d 660 (N.Y. App. Div. 1988)
Case details for

Barbera v. DeRostaing

Case Details

Full title:TINA M. BARBERA, an Infant, by Her Mother, DONNA BARBERA, et al.…

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

Date published: May 31, 1988

Citations

140 A.D.2d 660 (N.Y. App. Div. 1988)

Citing Cases

Garten v. Mazlin

Ordered that one bill of costs is awarded to the respondents. In view of the appellant's failure to provide a…