Atterberry v. Serlin

CourtNew York Supreme Court Appellate Division
Citation85 A.D.3d 949,2011 N.Y. Slip Op. 05439,925 N.Y.S.2d 860
PartiesKathryn M. ATTERBERRY, appellant,v.SERLIN & SERLIN, etc., et al., respondents(and another title).
Decision Date21 June 2011

85 A.D.3d 949
925 N.Y.S.2d 860
2011 N.Y. Slip Op. 05439

Kathryn M. ATTERBERRY, appellant,
v.
SERLIN & SERLIN, etc., et al., respondents(and another title).

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.

June 21, 2011.


Neil H. Greenberg & Associates, P.C., Westbury, N.Y. (Justin M. Reilly of counsel), for appellant.Catalano Gallardo & Petropoulos, LLP, Jericho, N.Y. (Matthew K. Flanagan of counsel), for respondents.

[85 A.D.3d 949] In an action to recover damages for legal malpractice, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Lally, J.), dated August 5, 2010, which denied her motion to vacate the dismissal of the action pursuant to CPLR 3216 and to extend her time to file a note of issue.

ORDERED that the order is reversed, on the facts and in the exercise of discretion, with costs, and the plaintiff's motion to vacate the dismissal of the action pursuant to CPLR 3216 and to extend the time to file a note of issue is granted.

CPLR 3216 is an “extremely forgiving” statute ( Baczkowski v Collins Constr. Co., 89 N.Y.2d 499, 503, 655 N.Y.S.2d 848, 678 N.E.2d 460), which “never requires, but merely authorizes, the Supreme Court to dismiss a plaintiff's action based on the plaintiff's unreasonable neglect to proceed” ( Davis v. Goodsell, 6 A.D.3d 382, 383, 774 N.Y.S.2d 568; see

[925 N.Y.S.2d 861]

Di Simone v. Good Samaritan Hosp., 100 N.Y.2d 632, 633, 768 N.Y.S.2d 735, 800 N.E.2d 1102; Gibson v. Fakheri, 77 A.D.3d 619, 908 N.Y.S.2d 356; Ferrera v. Esposit, 66 A.D.3d 637, 638, 886 N.Y.S.2d 757). Although the statute prohibits the Supreme Court from dismissing an action based on failure to prosecute whenever the plaintiff has shown a justifiable excuse [85 A.D.3d 950] for the delay and the existence of a potentially meritorious cause of action, “such a dual showing is not strictly necessary in order for the plaintiff to escape such a dismissal” ( Davis v. Goodsell, 6 A.D.3d at 384, 774 N.Y.S.2d 568; see Baczkowski v Collins Constr. Co., 89 N.Y.2d at 503–504, 655 N.Y.S.2d 848, 678 N.E.2d 460; Gibson v. Fakheri, 77 A.D.3d 619, 908 N.Y.S.2d 356; Ferrera v. Esposit, 66 A.D.3d at 638, 886 N.Y.S.2d 757).

Here, the plaintiff attempted to file her note of issue 10 days beyond the deadline set by the Supreme Court's certification order, and the defendants did not claim that they have been prejudiced by the minimal delay ( see Kadyimov v. MacKinnon, 82 A.D.3d 938, 918 N.Y.S.2d 770). In addition, the delay in filing a...

To continue reading

Request your trial
9 practice notes
  • JP Morgan Chase Bank, Nat'l Ass'n v. Ilardo
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court (New York)
    • March 5, 2012
    ...; Orgel v. Stewart Title Ins. Co., 91 A.D.3d 922, 938 N.Y.S.2d 131 [2d Dept. 2012] ; see also CPLR 3216 ; Atterberry v. Serlin & Serlin, 85 A.D.3d 949, 925 N.Y.S.2d 860 [2d Dept.2011], ( CPLR 3216 is a "extremely forgiving" statute which "never requires, but merely authorizes, the Supreme C......
  • Deutsche Bank Nat'l Trust Co. v. Inga, 2015–11721
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court Appellate Division
    • December 20, 2017
    ...N.E.2d 1102 ; Baczkowski v. Collins Constr. Co., 89 N.Y.2d at 504–505, 655 N.Y.S.2d 848, 678 N.E.2d 460 ; Atterberry v. Serlin & Serlin, 85 A.D.3d 949, 925 N.Y.S.2d 860 ). Under the circumstances of this case, the Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in granting the defendant'......
  • Piszczatowski v. Hill
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court Appellate Division
    • March 13, 2012
    ...( see Di Simone v. Good Samaritan Hosp., 100 N.Y.2d 632, 633–634, 768 N.Y.S.2d 735, 800 N.E.2d 1102; Atterberry v. Serlin & Serlin, 85 A.D.3d 949, 925 N.Y.S.2d 860; Lauri v. Freeport Union Free School Dist., 78 A.D.3d 1130, 912 N.Y.S.2d 278). Furthermore, there is no evidence in the record ......
  • Sanders v. N.Y. City Hous. Auth.
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court Appellate Division
    • June 21, 2011
    ...and the appointment of the appellant as the administratrix of the plaintiff's estate, the further three-year delay between the [925 N.Y.S.2d 860] appointment of the appellant as administratrix and the underlying motion, inter alia, seeking her substitution in this action, the failure to pro......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
9 cases
  • JP Morgan Chase Bank, Nat'l Ass'n v. Ilardo
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court (New York)
    • March 5, 2012
    ...; Orgel v. Stewart Title Ins. Co., 91 A.D.3d 922, 938 N.Y.S.2d 131 [2d Dept. 2012] ; see also CPLR 3216 ; Atterberry v. Serlin & Serlin, 85 A.D.3d 949, 925 N.Y.S.2d 860 [2d Dept.2011], ( CPLR 3216 is a "extremely forgiving" statute which "never requires, but merely authorizes, the Supreme C......
  • Deutsche Bank Nat'l Trust Co. v. Inga, 2015–11721
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court Appellate Division
    • December 20, 2017
    ...N.E.2d 1102 ; Baczkowski v. Collins Constr. Co., 89 N.Y.2d at 504–505, 655 N.Y.S.2d 848, 678 N.E.2d 460 ; Atterberry v. Serlin & Serlin, 85 A.D.3d 949, 925 N.Y.S.2d 860 ). Under the circumstances of this case, the Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in granting the defendant'......
  • Piszczatowski v. Hill
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court Appellate Division
    • March 13, 2012
    ...( see Di Simone v. Good Samaritan Hosp., 100 N.Y.2d 632, 633–634, 768 N.Y.S.2d 735, 800 N.E.2d 1102; Atterberry v. Serlin & Serlin, 85 A.D.3d 949, 925 N.Y.S.2d 860; Lauri v. Freeport Union Free School Dist., 78 A.D.3d 1130, 912 N.Y.S.2d 278). Furthermore, there is no evidence in the record ......
  • Sanders v. N.Y. City Hous. Auth.
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court Appellate Division
    • June 21, 2011
    ...and the appointment of the appellant as the administratrix of the plaintiff's estate, the further three-year delay between the [925 N.Y.S.2d 860] appointment of the appellant as administratrix and the underlying motion, inter alia, seeking her substitution in this action, the failure to pro......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT