Opinion
2014-01-9
Anna PEZHMAN, Plaintiff–Appellant, v. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION OF the CITY OF NEW YORK, et al., Defendants–Respondents.
Anna Pezhman, appellant pro se. Michael A. Cardozo, Corporation Counsel, New York (Julian L. Kalkstein of counsel), for respondents.
Anna Pezhman, appellant pro se. Michael A. Cardozo, Corporation Counsel, New York (Julian L. Kalkstein of counsel), for respondents.
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Louis B. York, J.), entered September 25, 2013, dismissing with prejudice plaintiff's action alleging defamation, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
The decision to grant a continuance is “within the sound discretion of the trial court and should not be disturbed absent a clear abuse of that discretion” (CPLR 4402; Mayorga v. Jocarl & Ron Co., 41 A.D.3d 132, 134, 839 N.Y.S.2d 8 [1st Dept.2007], appeal dismissed9 N.Y.3d 996, 849 N.Y.S.2d 22, 879 N.E.2d 162 [2007] [internal citations omitted]; Balogh v. H.R.B. Caterers, 88 A.D.2d 136, 143, 452 N.Y.S.2d 220 [2d Dept.1982] ). The court providently exercised its discretion in denying plaintiff's request for a continuance to retain an attorney to represent her. The record shows that plaintiff chose to proceed pro se despite advice from two judges, including the trial court judge, apparently believing that she could represent herself adequately without an attorney. Further, litigation has been ongoing for nine years, and granting plaintiff time to find an attorney, and time for that attorney to prepare for trial, would result in further delay, prejudicing defendants. As the evidence submitted by plaintiff thus far does not establish a defamation claim, dismissal was proper.
We have reviewed plaintiff's remaining contentions, including her request for sanctions, and find them unavailing. GONZALEZ, P.J., TOM, FRIEDMAN, MANZANET–DANIELS, JJ., concur.