From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Decicco v. Cobble Hill Nursing Home, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Aug 2, 1993
196 A.D.2d 476 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)

Opinion

August 2, 1993

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


Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The record indicates that the plaintiff stipulated to an unconditional extension of time for the defendant to serve its answer up to and including September 9, 1990. The defendant served an answer on September 17, 1990. Thus, there was only a short delay in serving the answer. Moreover, since it is undisputed that the pertinent Statute of Limitations for the wrongful death cause of action already had expired on August 23, 1990, the plaintiff has failed to explain how he was prejudiced by the delay. Under the circumstances, we conclude that the Supreme Court did not err in granting the defendant's cross motion to extend its time to answer (see, Shopsin v Siben Siben, 189 A.D.2d 810; Cotter v Consolidated Edison Co., 99 A.D.2d 738).

We have reviewed the plaintiff's remaining contentions and conclude that they are without merit. Bracken, J.P., Balletta, Eiber, O'Brien and Pizzuto, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Decicco v. Cobble Hill Nursing Home, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Aug 2, 1993
196 A.D.2d 476 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)
Case details for

Decicco v. Cobble Hill Nursing Home, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:DOMINICK P. DECICCO, JR., Individually and as Administrator of the Estate…

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

Date published: Aug 2, 1993

Citations

196 A.D.2d 476 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)
601 N.Y.S.2d 840

Citing Cases

Moore v. Somiprasad

(Cotter v. Consolidated Edison Co., 99 ad2D 738 [1st Dept. 1984]). The approach adopted by the First…