Lee v. Rad

• Decision Date: 07 October 2015
• Docket Number: 2015-00100, Index No. 2659/11.
• Parties: Misun LEE, appellant, v. Cyrus K. RAD, et al., respondents.
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

132 A.D.3d 643
17 N.Y.S.3d 489
2015 N.Y. Slip Op. 07248

Misun LEE, appellant
v.
Cyrus K. RAD, et al., respondents.

2015-00100, Index No. 2659/11.

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

Oct. 7, 2015.

17 N.Y.S.3d 490

John I. Kim, Flushing, N.Y., for appellant.

Richard T. Lau, Jericho, N.Y. (Marcella Gerbasi Crewe of counsel), for respondent Cyrus K. Rad.

Martin, Fallon & Mullé, Huntington, N.Y. (Michael P. Ross of counsel), for respondent Kayhan Sarab.

WILLIAM F. MASTRO, J.P., L. PRISCILLA HALL, SANDRA L. SGROI, and COLLEEN D. DUFFY, JJ.

Opinion

132 A.D.3d 643

In a consolidated action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals, as limited by her brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Taylor, J.), entered October 16, 2014, as granted the separate motions of the defendants Cyrus K. Rad and Kayhan Sarab pursuant to CPLR 3216 to dismiss the complaint insofar as asserted against each of them for failure to prosecute.

ORDERED that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law and in the exercise of discretion, with one bill of costs, and the separate motions of the defendants Cyrus K. Rad and Kayhan Sarab pursuant to CPLR 3216 to dismiss the complaint insofar as asserted against each of them are denied.

CPLR 3216 is “extremely forgiving” (Baczkowski v. Collins Constr. Co., 89 N.Y.2d 499, 503, 655 N.Y.S.2d 848, 678 N.E.2d 460 ) in that it “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, 383–384, 774 N.Y.S.2d 568 ; see CPLR 3216[a], [e] ; Di Simone v. Good Samaritan Hosp., 100 N.Y.2d 632, 633, 768 N.Y.S.2d 735, 800 N.E.2d 1102 ; Baczkowski v. Collins Constr. Co., 89 N.Y.2d 499, 504–505, 655 N.Y.S.2d 848, 678 N.E.2d 460 ). When served with a 90–day demand pursuant to CPLR 3216, it is incumbent upon a plaintiff to comply with the demand by filing a note of issue or by moving, before the default date, either...