Opinion
2008-1092 Q C.
Decided on July 9, 2009.
Appeal from a decision of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Queens County (Anna Culley, J.), dated September 21, 2007, deemed from a judgment of the same court entered May 21, 2008 (see CPLR 5520 [c]). The judgment, after a nonjury trial, awarded plaintiff the principal sum of $912.
Judgment affirmed without costs.
PRESENT: PESCE, P.J., GOLIA and RIOS, JJ.
At the commencement of the trial in this action by a provider to recover assigned first-party no-fault benefits, the parties stipulated to plaintiff's prima facie case. Thereafter, defendant's attorney, in effect, requested an adjournment, stating that he had subpoenaed a witness, who had not appeared. The court stated that defendant had received two prior adjournments, that defendant had had more than a month to subpoena the witness and that it had not secured the so-ordered subpoena until the day before the trial. The court declined to grant any further adjournments, and ordered that judgment be entered in plaintiff's favor. Defendant appeals from this decision. A judgment was subsequently entered, from which we deem the appeal ( see CPLR 5520 [c]).
It is well settled that an application for an adjournment is addressed to the sound discretion of the trial court ( see Nieves v Tomonska, 306 AD2d 332; see also Samuel v F.E.G.S. Russian Ctr. , 11 Misc 3d 130 [A], 2006 NY Slip Op 50308[U] [App Term, 2d 11th Jud Dists 2006]), and the court's determination will not be disturbed absent an improvident exercise of that discretion ( see Wolosin v Campo, 256 AD2d 332; Klein v Klein , 6 Misc 3d 132 [A], 2005 NY Slip Op 50106[U] [App Term, 2d 11th Jud Dists 2005]). We find that the Civil Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in declining to grant defendant an adjournment. Accordingly, the judgment is affirmed.
Pesce, P.J., Golia and Rios, JJ., concur.