From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

CATHEDRAL PARKWAY v. RICHARD DONALD CONS

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jun 10, 1999
262 A.D.2d 110 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)

Opinion

June 10, 1999.

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Franklin Weissberg, J.).


Plaintiffs' attorney properly mailed the motion to restore to the address that defendants' attorney had designated as his office in the first set of papers he served on plaintiffs' attorney ( Deygoo v. Eastern Abstract Corp., 204 A.D.2d 596, lv dismissed in part and denied in part 84 N.Y.2d 920). Nor was plaintiffs' attorney required by CPLR 2103 (c) to serve the motion directly on defendants, notwithstanding that the case had been off-calendar for more than a year and presumptively abandoned, absent any indication that defendants' attorney had withdrawn in accordance with CPLR 321 (b). We have considered defendants' other arguments and find them unavailing.

Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Williams, Wallach, Lerner and Friedman, JJ.


Summaries of

CATHEDRAL PARKWAY v. RICHARD DONALD CONS

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jun 10, 1999
262 A.D.2d 110 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)
Case details for

CATHEDRAL PARKWAY v. RICHARD DONALD CONS

Case Details

Full title:CATHEDRAL PARKWAY ASSOCIATES et al., Respondents, v. RICHARD DONALD…

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

Date published: Jun 10, 1999

Citations

262 A.D.2d 110 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)
689 N.Y.S.2d 640