First Union Auto Finance, Inc. v. Donat

Citation791 N.Y.S.2d 596,16 A.D.3d 372,2005 NY Slip Op 01676
Decision Date07 March 2005
Docket Number2004-02639.
PartiesFIRST UNION AUTO FINANCE, INC., Respondent, v. JOSEPH DONAT, Appellant, and RAMP CHEVROLET, INC., Respondent.
CourtNew York Supreme Court Appellate Division

Ordered that the appeals from the orders dated August 5, 2003, and August 12, 2003, respectively, are dismissed, as no appeal lies as of right from an order that does not decide a motion made on notice and leave to appeal has not been granted (see CPLR 5701 [a] [2]); and it is further,

Ordered that the order dated February 24, 2004, is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, and the motion and cross motion are denied; and it is further,

Ordered that one bill of costs is awarded to the appellant.

The Supreme Court's order, which was issued before the ruling of the Court of Appeals in Brill v City of New York (2 NY3d 648 [2004]), erroneously granted the motion and the cross motion. It is uncontroverted that the plaintiff's motion, and the cross motion of the defendant Ramp Chevrolet, Inc. (hereinafter Chevrolet), were made more than 60 days after the note of issue was filed. Since it is also uncontroverted by the plaintiff and Chevrolet that rule 13 of the Uniform Civil Trial Rules of the Supreme Court, Kings County, provides that summary judgment motions must be made within 60 days of the filing of the note of issue, in this case, pursuant to CPLR 3212 (a), the merits of the motion should not have been considered unless good cause was shown for the delay.

Neither the plaintiff nor Chevrolet even alleged, let alone showed, the existence of such good cause. Furthermore, contrary to the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
8 cases
  • Foreman v. Town of Oyster Bay
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court Appellate Division
    • June 1, 2016
    ...it has knowledge” (Benjamin v. City of New York, 64 N.Y.2d 44, 46, 484 N.Y.S.2d 525, 473 N.E.2d 753 ; Engelhart v. County of Orange, 16 A.D.3d at 372, 790 N.Y.S.2d 704 ; Muzich v. Bonomolo, 209 A.D.2d 387, 388–389, 618 N.Y.S.2d 437 ).Here, the Town established its prima facie entitlement to......
  • Dolub v. Shpolyansky
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court (New York)
    • September 30, 2020
    ...motions made by parties other than the City of New York must be made within sixty (60) days. See First Union Auto Fin., Inc. v. Donat, 16 A.D.3d 372, 372, 791 N.Y.S.2d 596, 597 [2d Dept 2005]. It is true that a cross-motion can be entertained in some circumstances when the initial motion wa......
  • Bennett v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co.
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court Appellate Division
    • October 20, 2021
    ...819 N.E.2d 995 ; Brill v. City of New York, 2 N.Y.3d at 652, 781 N.Y.S.2d 261, 814 N.E.2d 431 ; First Union Auto Fin., Inc. v. Donat, 16 A.D.3d 372, 373, 791 N.Y.S.2d 596 ), and should have denied the motion.In light of our determination on the cross appeals, the appeal has been rendered ac......
  • Bennett v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court (New York)
    • October 20, 2021
    ...v State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 3 N.Y.3d 725, 726; Brill v City of New York, 2 N.Y.3d at 652; First Union Auto Fin., Inc. v Donat, 16 A.D.3d 372, 373), and should have denied the motion. In light of our determination on the cross appeals, the appeal has been rendered academic. RIVERA, J.P......
  • 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