Ferreira v. Singh, 2018–01576
| Decision Date | 09 October 2019 |
| Docket Number | 2018–01576,Index No. 6129/12 |
| Citation | 176 A.D.3d 782,110 N.Y.S.3d 40 |
| Parties | Rita FERREIRA, Appellant, v. Amajeph SINGH, et al., Respondents. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
176 A.D.3d 782
110 N.Y.S.3d 40
Rita FERREIRA, Appellant,
v.
Amajeph SINGH, et al., Respondents.
2018–01576
Index No. 6129/12
Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Argued—May 2, 2019
October 9, 2019
Popkin & Popkin, LLP, New York, N.Y. (Eric F. Popkin of counsel), for appellant.
Picciano & Scahill, P.C., Bethpage, N.Y. (Andea E. Ferrucci of counsel), for respondents.
MARK C. DILLON, J.P., CHERYL E. CHAMBERS, COLLEEN D. DUFFY, BETSY BARROS, JJ.
DECISION & ORDER
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Timothy J. Dufficy, J.), entered December 11, 2017. The order, insofar as appealed from, denied those branches of the plaintiff's motion which were to vacate an order of the same court entered November 30, 2016, granting the defendants' unopposed motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102(d) as a result of the subject accident, and to restore the matter to the motion calendar.
ORDERED that the order entered December 11, 2017, is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the facts and in the exercise
of discretion, with costs, those branches of the plaintiff's motion which were to vacate the order entered November 30, 2016, and to restore the matter to the motion calendar are granted, and the matter is remitted to the Supreme Court, Queens County, for further proceedings consistent herewith.
On September 10, 2010, the plaintiff and the defendant Amajeph Singh were involved in a motor vehicle collision in Queens. The vehicle operated by Singh was owned by the defendant Katoria Taxi Corp. In March 2012, the plaintiff commenced this action against the defendants to recover damages for her personal injuries.
After discovery in which all parties participated, the defendants moved for summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102(d) as a result of the accident. The plaintiff failed to oppose the motion, and in an order entered November 30, 2016 (hereinafter the 2016 order), the Supreme Court granted the defendants' motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, upon the plaintiff's default in opposing the motion. In January 2017, the plaintiff moved to vacate the 2016 order entered upon her default. On March 16, 2017, however, the plaintiff failed to appear in court in support of her motion, and it was marked off the calendar.
In July 2017, the plaintiff moved, inter alia, to vacate the 2016 order entered upon her default in...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Sauteanu v. BJ's Wholesale Club, Inc.
...Ntansah, 145 A.D.3d 910, 911, 43 N.Y.S.3d 504 ; see also Jackson v. Kothuru, 183 A.D.3d 707, 709, 121 N.Y.S.3d 893 ; Ferreira v. Singh, 176 A.D.3d 782, 784, 110 N.Y.S.3d 40 ). Here, a managing attorney at the law firm representing the plaintiff was notified of the February 28, 2018 adjourne......
- People v. Hightower
-
Jacobson v. Val
... ... affirmation that he failed to make an entry in his office ... calendaring system (see Ferreira v Singh, 176 A.D.3d ... 782, 784; Bank of N.Y. Mellon v Faragalla, 174 ... A.D.3d 677, 678-679; B ... ...
-
Merilus v. Nassau Inter Cnty. Express ("NICE")
...its discretion in accepting the plaintiff's excuse for the delay based on law office failure (see CPLR 2005 ; Ferreira v. Singh, 176 A.D.3d 782, 784, 110 N.Y.S.3d 40 ; Kohn v. Kohn, 86 A.D.3d 630, 928 N.Y.S.2d 55 ). In addition, the plaintiff, through the verified complaint and her affidavi......