Opinion
January 30, 1989
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Queens County (Zelman, J.).
Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, and the defendant's motion is granted.
On July 9, 1987, more than one year after the joinder of issue, the defendant served upon the plaintiff a demand that she resume prosecution of the action. More than 90 days thereafter, the defendant made the instant motion to dismiss the action for want of prosecution (CPLR 3216). The attorney for the plaintiff opposed the motion by submitting an affirmation which contained, inter alia, a brief and conclusory assertion that the plaintiff's claim was meritorious. In light of the plaintiff's failure to submit a competent affidavit of merit, the court erred in denying the defendant's motion to dismiss for want of prosecution (see, e.g., Juracka v Ferrara, 137 A.D.2d 921, 922; Midolo v Horner, 131 A.D.2d 825, 826; Seidman v Shames, 130 A.D.2d 568; Mihaly v Mahoney, 126 A.D.2d 791, 793). Bracken, J.P., Rubin, Sullivan and Harwood, JJ., concur.