From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hercules v. City of New York

Appellate Term of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 27, 2004
2004 N.Y. Slip Op. 51282 (N.Y. App. Term 2004)

Opinion

2003-1218 KC.

Decided October 27, 2004.

Appeal by plaintiff from an order of the Civil Court, Kings County (A. Schack, J.), entered on June 18, 2003, which denied his motion to restore the case to the calendar.

Order unanimously affirmed without costs.

PRESENT: ARONIN, J.P., PATTERSON and RIOS, JJ.


Since plaintiff's motion was made more than one year after the action was stricken from the calendar, plaintiff was required to demonstrate a reasonable excuse for the delay of 14 months in moving to restore the action to the calendar, a meritorious claim, a lack of intent to abandon the action and a lack of prejudice to the defendant ( see LoFredo v. CMC Occupational Health Servs., 189 Misc 2d 781; Basetti v. Nour, 287 AD2d 126). Plaintiff failed to provide a reasonable excuse for the delay in moving to restore the action to the calendar. Moreover, plaintiff's motion was not supported by an affidavit of merit. Plaintiff submitted the transcript from a hearing held pursuant to General Municipal Law § 50-h which was not notarized and was patently insufficient to establish a meritorious cause of action. Additionally, plaintiff failed to establish a lack of prejudice to the defendant and a lack of intent to abandon the action.


Summaries of

Hercules v. City of New York

Appellate Term of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 27, 2004
2004 N.Y. Slip Op. 51282 (N.Y. App. Term 2004)
Case details for

Hercules v. City of New York

Case Details

Full title:MATTHEW HERCULES, Appellant, v. THE CITY OF NEW YORK, Respondent

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

Date published: Oct 27, 2004

Citations

2004 N.Y. Slip Op. 51282 (N.Y. App. Term 2004)