Baruch v. Nassau Cnty.
| Decision Date | 02 December 2015 |
| Citation | 20 N.Y.S.3d 425,134 A.D.3d 658 |
| Parties | Zakay BARUCH, appellant, v. NASSAU COUNTY, et al., defendants, Village of Great Neck, respondent. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
134 A.D.3d 658
20 N.Y.S.3d 425
Zakay BARUCH, appellant,
v.
NASSAU COUNTY, et al., defendants,
Village of Great Neck, respondent.
Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Dec. 2, 2015.
Sacco & Fillas, LLP, Astoria, N.Y. (Albert R. Matuza, Jr., of counsel), for appellant.
White, Cirrito & Nally, LLP, Hempstead, N.Y. (James P. Nally of counsel), for respondent.
WILLIAM F. MASTRO, J.P., JOHN M. LEVENTHAL, SHERI S. ROMAN, and BETSY BARROS, JJ.
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Sher, J.), entered April 22, 2014, which denied his motion for leave to enter judgment on the issue of liability against the defendant Village of Great Neck upon that defendant's failure to appear or answer the complaint, and granted the cross motion of the defendant Village of Great Neck pursuant to CPLR 3215(c) to dismiss the complaint insofar as asserted against it as abandoned.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.
In August 2012, the plaintiff commenced this action to
recover damages for personal injuries against, among others, the Village of Great Neck, alleging that he was injured when he stepped on a defective manhole cover maintained by the Village, and it "flipped and went up on its side." The plaintiff served the Village with a summons and complaint on August 13, 2012, and the Village did not appear or answer the complaint. In December 2013, more than one year after the Village's default, the plaintiff moved for leave to enter judgment on the issue of liability against the Village upon its failure to appear or answer the complaint. The Village cross-moved pursuant to CPLR 3215(c) to dismiss the complaint insofar as asserted against it as abandoned. In an order entered April 22, 2014, the Supreme Court denied the motion and granted the cross motion.
...To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Ibrahim v. Nablus Sweets Corp.
...was vague, conclusory, and unsubstantiated (see U.S. Bank, N.A. v. Dorvelus, 140 A.D.3d at 852, 32 N.Y.S.3d 631; Baruch v. Nassau County, 134 A.D.3d 658, 659, 20 N.Y.S.3d 425 ; Mattera v. Capric, 54 A.D.3d 827, 828, 864 N.Y.S.2d 98 ). The excuse was contained in a brief paragraph in the sup......
-
Karamuco v. Gavriel Plaza, Inc.
...discretion of the motion court (see Bank of N.Y. Mellon v. Izmirligil, 144 A.D.3d 1067, 1069, 44 N.Y.S.3d 44 ; Baruch v. Nassau County, 134 A.D.3d 658, 659, 20 N.Y.S.3d 425 ).Here, the plaintiffs took no proceedings for the entry of a default judgment within one year following the defendant......
-
A.H. Physical Therapy v. 21st Century Advantage Ins. Co.
...should not be dismissed" (see Pipinias v J. Sackaris & Sons, Inc., 116 A.D.3d 749, 750 [2d Dept 2014]; see also Baruch v Nassau County, 134 A.D.3d 658, 659 [2d Dept 2015]). "The language of CPLR 3215 (c) is not, in the first instance, discretionary, but mandatory, inasmuch as courts 'shall'......
-
A.H. Physical Therapy v. 21st Century Advantage Ins. Co.
... ... Sackaris & Sons, ... Inc., 116 A.D.3d 749, 750 [2d Dept 2014]; see also ... Baruch v Nassau County, 134 A.D.3d 658, 659 [2d Dept ... 2015]) ... "The ... ...