From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Vasquez v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 22, 2004
5 A.D.3d 672 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)

Opinion

2003-04541.

Decided March 22, 2004.

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendants James Zacharakos and Chris Varveris appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Jacobson, J.), dated April 2, 2003, as, in effect, denied their motion pursuant to CPLR 3216 to dismiss the complaint insofar as asserted against them for failure to file a note of issue.

Dougherty, Ryan, Giuffra, Zambito Hession, New York, N.Y. (Robert J. Giuffra of counsel), for appellants.

Before: A. GAIL PRUDENTI, P.J., ANITA R. FLORIO, HOWARD MILLER, ROBERT W. SCHMIDT, BARRY A. COZIER, JJ.


DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.

The appellants moved to dismiss the complaint insofar as asserted against them on the ground that the plaintiff failed to file a note of issue in response to a 90-day demand pursuant to CPLR 3216(b)(3). However, the 90-day period runs from the date of actual receipt of the demand by the plaintiff or by some person authorized to receive such demand by the plaintiff, rather than from the date of service ( see Kun Tiam Seow v. Yu Dan Li, 1 A.D.3d 570; 176-60 Union Turnpike v. Klinger, 284 A.D.2d 380; Ponce v. Ricupero, 282 A.D.2d 589; Indemnity Ins. Co. v. Lamendola, 261 A.D.2d 580, 582). The appellants failed to establish that the plaintiff or anyone acting on her behalf received the 90-day demand. Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly denied the appellants' motion to dismiss ( see Roth v. Black Star Publ. Co., 302 A.D.2d 442; Weber v. Kessler, 224 A.D.2d 520; Divjak v. New York Hosp.-Cornell Med. Ctr., 219 A.D.2d 695).

PRUDENTI, P.J., FLORIO, H. MILLER, SCHMIDT and COZIER, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Vasquez v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 22, 2004
5 A.D.3d 672 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)
Case details for

Vasquez v. City of New York

Case Details

Full title:MIGDALINA VASQUEZ, respondent, v. CITY OF NEW YORK, defendant, JAMES…

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

Date published: Mar 22, 2004

Citations

5 A.D.3d 672 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)
774 N.Y.S.2d 728

Citing Cases

Walker v. State

CPLR 3216 authorizes the Court, on its own initiative, to dismiss a Claim for failure to prosecute so long as…

Speed v. State

Furthermore, pursuant to CPLR 3216, the demand must require "the party against whom such relief is sought to…