Opinion
March 19, 1990
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Cohen, J.).
Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, the motion is granted, the complaint is dismissed as against the defendant Mario Roldan, and the action against the remaining defendant is severed.
We find that the court improperly denied the defendant Mario Roldan's motion to dismiss the complaint as against him since the plaintiff failed to show a justifiable excuse for the delay in placing this action on the Trial Calendar and a meritorious cause of action (see, Keating v Smith, 20 A.D.2d 141). No statement of merits sworn to by one having personal knowledge of the facts was submitted in opposition to the motion (see, Koriba, Inc. v Porco, 116 A.D.2d 630; Versatile Furniture Prods. v 32-8 Maujer Realty, 97 A.D.2d 463). The verified complaint was insufficient since it was verified by the plaintiff's attorney who did not have personal knowledge of the facts (see, Duqmaq v Steward, 137 A.D.2d 653). Kunzeman, J.P., Kooper, Sullivan and Miller, JJ., concur.