Opinion
No. 570793/12.
2012-11-14
SAV–ON PROCESS SERVICE, INC., Plaintiff v. Michael S. LAMONSOFF, Esq., Defendant–Appellant.
Defendant, as limited by his briefs, appeals from that portion of an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, New York County (Arlene P. Bluth, J.), entered May 16, 2012, which denied his motion to impose sanctions against plaintiff.
Present: LOWE, III, P.J., SCHOENFELD, TORRES, JJ.
PER CURIAM.
Order (Arlene P. Bluth, J.), entered on May 16, 2012, affirmed, with $10 costs.
We find no abuse of discretion in the denial of defendant's motion for Rule 130 sanctions. The second of the two actions initiated by plaintiff against defendant—filed after defendant stopped payment on the check tendered in connection with the purported settlement of the prior action—was not shown to have been brought solely to harass or to constitute the type of frivolous, groundless litigation envisioned by 22 NYCRR 130—1.1(c) ( see Parks v. Leahey & Johnson, 81 N.Y.2d 161 [1993];Komolov v. Segal, 96 AD3d 513, 514 [2012];LaRussa v. LaRussa, 232 A.D.2d 297 [1996] ). Nor was defendant entitled to sanctions pursuant to CPLR 8303–a, since that provision finds no application in this breach of contract action ( see Iannello v. Allstate Ins. Co., 292 A.D.2d 789 [2002] ).
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.
I concur.