From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Piccirillo v. Greenspan

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Feb 19, 2002
291 A.D.2d 486 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)

Opinion

2001-08167

Submitted January 16, 2002.

February 19, 2002.

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries etc., the defendant appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Gigante, J.), dated April 12, 2001, as denied his application to dismiss the complaint pursuant to CPLR 3215(c) and directed him to serve an answer.

Murray Lemonik, Jericho, N.Y. (Kathleen M. Geiger of counsel), for appellant.

Before: MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, J.P., NANCY E. SMITH, GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN, LEO F. McGINITY, BARRY A. COZIER, JJ.


ORDERED that on the court's own motion, the appellant's notice of appeal is treated as an application for leave to appeal, and leave to appeal is granted (see, CPLR 5701[c]); and it is further,

ORDERED that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, the application is granted, and the complaint is dismissed; and it is further,

ORDERED that the appellant is awarded one bill of costs.

In opposition to the plaintiffs' motion for leave to enter a default judgment, the defendant made an application to dismiss the complaint pursuant to CPLR 3215(c) because the plaintiffs failed to take proceedings for the entry of a judgment within one year after the default. To avoid such a dismissal, a plaintiff must offer a reasonable excuse for the delay and demonstrate the merits of the complaint (see, CPLR 3215 [c]; Akler v. Booth Mem. Med. Ctr., 257 A.D.2d 640; Winfield v. Garenani, 246 A.D.2d 537; Richards v. Lewis, 243 A.D.2d 615). Here, the plaintiffs failed to offer a reasonable excuse for their delay (see, Rafiq v. Weston, 171 A.D.2d 783; Monzon v. Sony Motor, 115 A.D.2d 714), or demonstrate a meritorious action. Thus, the complaint should have been dismissed.

ALTMAN, J.P., SMITH, KRAUSMAN, McGINITY and COZIER, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Piccirillo v. Greenspan

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Feb 19, 2002
291 A.D.2d 486 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
Case details for

Piccirillo v. Greenspan

Case Details

Full title:CONCETTA PICCIRILLO, ET AL., respondents, v. NACHUM Y. GREENSPAN, appellant

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

Date published: Feb 19, 2002

Citations

291 A.D.2d 486 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
738 N.Y.S.2d 224

Citing Cases

Turnbull v. Summit Entertainment Corp.

ORDERED that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, with costs, the cross motion is…

Radish v. Rodriquez

Given the plaintiffs failure to present evidence of a viable cause of action, the court should have denied…