Matter of People v. BBC Prop. Portfolio

• Decision Date: 15 February 2001
• Citation: 721 N.Y.S.2d 825
• Parties: (A.D. 2 Dept. 2001) In the Matter of People of the State of New York, etc., petitioner-respondent, v. BBC Properties Portfolio Corp., et al., respondents, Steven Bloom, et al., appellants. 2000-01156 Submitted -
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

Page 825

721 N.Y.S.2d 825 (A.D. 2 Dept. 2001)

In the Matter of People of the State of New York, etc., petitioner-respondent, v. BBC Properties Portfolio Corp., et al., respondents, Steven Bloom, et al., appellants.

2000-01156

SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

Submitted - February 15, 2001

March 19, 2001

DelBello Donnellan Weingarten Tartaglia Wise & Wiederkehr, LLP, White Plains, N.Y. (Lee S. Wiederkehr and William E. Dumke of counsel), for appellants.

Eliot Spitzer, Attorney-General, New York, N.Y. (Mark S. Gimpel and Patrick J. Walsh of counsel), for petitioner-respondent.

In a proceeding, inter alia, pursuant to Executive Law § 63(12) to permanently enjoin certain allegedly fraudulent business activity, Steven Bloom and Ronald Jacobson appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Bellantoni, J.), entered January 5, 2000, which denied their motion pursuant to CPLR 3012(d) for an extension of time to serve an answer to the petition.

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.

To prevail on their motion for an extension of time to serve an answer, the appellants were obligated to demonstrate a reasonable excuse for the delay (see, CPLR 3012[d]). Whether an excuse is reasonable is a matter within the sound discretion of the trial court (see, Special Prods. Mfg. v Douglass, 159 A.D.2d 847). The appellants failed to adequately explain the reason for their three-month delay, which was vaguely attributed to a lack of available documentation from their title insurance carrier and "apparent" law office failure. Under the facts of this case, the purported excuse was insufficient to establish a reasonable excuse (see, Miles v Blue Label Trucking, 232 A.D.2d 382; Martyn v Jones, 166 A.D.2d 508; Peters v Pickard, 143 A.D.2d 81; Chochla v Oak Beach Inn Corp., 115 A.D.2d 584).

SANTUCCI, J.P., S. MILLER, McGINITY and SMITH, JJ., concur.