From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Greenburger v. Diether

Appellate Term of the Supreme Court of New York. First Department
Oct 21, 2005
10 Misc. 3d 21 (N.Y. App. Term 2005)

Opinion

570390/04.

October 21, 2005.

APPEAL from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, New York County (Dawn M. Jimenez, J.), dated July 3, 2003. The order denied respondent's motion to place her severed counterclaims on the court calendar and granted petitioner's cross motion to the extent of deeming the counterclaims abandoned.

David Rozenholc Associates, New York City ( David Rozenholc, Richard S. Laudor and David H. Pritchard of counsel), for appellant.

Belkin Wenig Goldman, LLP, New York City ( Sherwin Belkin, Magda L. Cruz and Jay H. Berg of counsel), for Francis Greenburger, respondent.

PRESENT: SUAREZ, P.J., McCOOE and GANGEL-JACOB, JJ., concur.


OPINION OF THE COURT


Order dated July 3, 2003 reversed, with $10 costs, tenant's motion granted and landlord's cross motion denied.

In defense of a holdover summary proceeding instituted by landlord, the tenant interposed three affirmative defenses and six counterclaims, including counterclaims alleging negligent and intentional infliction of emotional distress and prima facie tort. The counterclaims were severed "without prejudice" by an unappealed order of March 20, 2001, and the holdover proceeding was voluntarily discontinued by landlord in May 2001. Tenant moved, in July 2002, "to place the counterclaims . . . on the appropriate Civil Court calendar for trial," prompting the landlord's cross motion to dismiss the counterclaims as abandoned pursuant to 22 NYCRR 208.14 (c).

The court rule sought to be invoked by landlord, headed "Calendar default; restoration; dismissal," finds no application in the case at bar, it being undisputed that tenant's severed counterclaims had not been "stricken from the calendar" by virtue of a "calendar default." In this procedural posture, and in the absence of a demand by landlord that tenant resume prosecution of the counterclaims pursuant to CPLR 3216 (b) ( cf. Interstate Equip. Corp. v. Bell, 288 AD2d 809), "there is no legal basis for the dismissal of [tenant's] counterclaims on the grounds of abandonment" ( Trustees of Freeholders Commonalty of Town of Southampton v. Heilner, 143 AD2d 134, 135). This is so notwithstanding tenant's delay in prosecuting the counterclaims ( id.).


Summaries of

Greenburger v. Diether

Appellate Term of the Supreme Court of New York. First Department
Oct 21, 2005
10 Misc. 3d 21 (N.Y. App. Term 2005)
Case details for

Greenburger v. Diether

Case Details

Full title:FRANCIS GREENBURGER, Respondent, v. DORIS DIETHER, Appellant, et al.…

Court:Appellate Term of the Supreme Court of New York. First Department

Date published: Oct 21, 2005

Citations

10 Misc. 3d 21 (N.Y. App. Term 2005)
2005 N.Y. Slip Op. 25446
806 N.Y.S.2d 327

Citing Cases

Bldg Mgmt. Co. Inc. v. Meija

Even prior to Chavez, the Appellate Term, First Department consistently held that 22 NYCRR § 208.14 was not…

Partnership 92 v. Dobrolowicz

We agree that the reservation of rights provision contained in the parties' March 11, 1999 settlement…