From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Cordero v. Singh

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jun 11, 2002
295 A.D.2d 154 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)

Opinion

1330

June 11, 2002.

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Gerald Esposito, J.), entered on or about May 7, 2001, which granted plaintiff's motion to restore the action to the compliance calendar, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

BRIAN J. ISAAC, for Plaintiff-Respondent.

MICHAEL I. JOSEPHS, for Defendants-Appellants.

Nardelli, J.P., Mazzarelli, Buckley, Sullivan, Marlow, JJ.


Since no note of issue has been filed in this case, defendants, or the court, could have sered a 90-day demand to file a note of issue pursuant to CPLR 3216. A motion to dismiss pursuant to CPLR 3404, however, applies only to delay after anote of issue has been filed (see, Johnson v. Sam Minskoff Sons, Inc., 287 A.D.2d 233;Lopez v. Imperial Delivery, 282 A.D.2d 190, lv dismissed 96 N.Y.2d 937). Under the circumstances, we perceive no reason to disturb the motion court's exercise of discretion in restoring the case to the court's compliance calendar.

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.


Summaries of

Cordero v. Singh

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jun 11, 2002
295 A.D.2d 154 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
Case details for

Cordero v. Singh

Case Details

Full title:RAFAEL JUNIOR CORDERO, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, v. GULLAR SINGH, ET AL.…

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

Date published: Jun 11, 2002

Citations

295 A.D.2d 154 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
743 N.Y.S.2d 272

Citing Cases

Gorski v. 1155 Tenants Corp.

American Yard Prods., 306 A.D.2d at 138; Cordero v. Singh, 295 A.D.2d 154, 154-55 (1st Dep't 2002); Boricua…