From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Cohen-Putnam v. Hudson Building

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 14, 2008
55 A.D.3d 653 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008)

Opinion

No. 2007-09262.

October 14, 2008.

In an action, inter alia, in effect, to recover damages for breach of an express warranty, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Putnam County (O'Rourke, J.), dated August 28, 2007, which granted the defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Louis J. Reda (Goldman Grossman, New York, N.Y. [Eleanor R. Goldman and Jay S. Grossman], of counsel), for appellant.

Daniels and Porco, LLP, Carmel, N.Y. (Robert C. Lusardi of counsel), for respondent.

Before: Skelos, J.P., Fisher, Dickerson and Belen, JJ.


Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, and the defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint is denied.

The Supreme Court erred in entertaining the summary judgment motion brought by the defendant long past the time required by CPLR 3212, in the absence good cause shown ( see Brill v City of New York, 2 NY3d 648; Dettmann v Page, 18 AD3d 422). Accordingly, the defendant's motion should have been denied.


Summaries of

Cohen-Putnam v. Hudson Building

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 14, 2008
55 A.D.3d 653 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008)
Case details for

Cohen-Putnam v. Hudson Building

Case Details

Full title:COHEN-PUTNAM AGENCY, LTD., Appellant, v. HUDSON BUILDING MAINTENANCE…

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

Date published: Oct 14, 2008

Citations

55 A.D.3d 653 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008)
2008 N.Y. Slip Op. 7853
864 N.Y.S.2d 792

Citing Cases

Ponce v. Liu

The defendant's vague and conclusory claim of conducting discovery in the third-party action and waiting for…

Ponce v. Liu

The defendant's vague and conclusory claim of conducting discovery in the third-party action and waiting for…