From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Heredia v. Two Kings, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Feb 17, 2004
4 A.D.3d 153 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)

Opinion

2853.

Decided February 17, 2004.

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Bertram Katz, J.), entered on or about October 8, 2002, which dismissed the action, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Brian J. Isaac, for Plaintiffs-Appellants.

Nancy Davis Lyness, for Defendants-Respondents.

Before: Buckley, P.J., Sullivan, Williams, Gonzalez, JJ.


The complaint was dismissed for failure to comply with the court's order to file a note of issue or complete discovery by the prescribed deadline (CPLR 3216). Although plaintiffs assert that they never received this order, the copy filed in the Bronx County Clerk's Office bears their counsel's signature acknowledging his receipt at the compliance conference, thus obviating the necessity of service by registered or certified mail ( Rijo v. McLaughlin, 309 A.D.2d 716). The wording of the order gave sufficient notice to plaintiffs that failure to comply with the demand would result in dismissal.

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.


Summaries of

Heredia v. Two Kings, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Feb 17, 2004
4 A.D.3d 153 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)
Case details for

Heredia v. Two Kings, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:ANDRES HEREDIA, ET AL., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. TWO KINGS, INC., ET AL.…

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

Date published: Feb 17, 2004

Citations

4 A.D.3d 153 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)
772 N.Y.S.2d 44

Citing Cases

Celik v. The City of New York

Therefore, the motion is denied in its entirety and Plaintiff is directed to file the note of issue and…