From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Ginsberg v. City of Long Beach

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 8, 1993
191 A.D.2d 478 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)

Opinion

March 8, 1993

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


Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The plaintiffs' first action was dismissed after the Supreme Court determined that they had inexcusably delayed in complying with a prior order directing them to file a note of issue. Under these circumstances, the dismissal of the prior action was for "neglect to prosecute" within the meaning of CPLR 205 (a) (see, Kelly v. Rosenthal, 176 A.D.2d 283; Scharlack v. Richmond Mem. Hosp., 144 A.D.2d 354). Since the six-month period to commence a new action pursuant to CPLR 205 (a) is not available to the plaintiffs, the instant action was properly dismissed as barred by the applicable Statute of Limitations.

Parenthetically, we note that the record on appeal contains certain information and papers which are not properly part of the record. Those materials were not considered in the determination of the appeal (see, Matter of Wish Realty Corp. v. Starr, 56 A.D.2d 656). Bracken, J.P., Eiber, Ritter and Pizzuto, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Ginsberg v. City of Long Beach

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 8, 1993
191 A.D.2d 478 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)
Case details for

Ginsberg v. City of Long Beach

Case Details

Full title:LENORE GINSBERG et al., Appellants, v. CITY OF LONG BEACH, Respondent

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

Date published: Mar 8, 1993

Citations

191 A.D.2d 478 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)
596 N.Y.S.2d 707

Citing Cases

Ajlaimo v. Velco Enterprises

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs. A prior action by the plaintiffs…