Slate v. Schiavone Const. Co.

• Court: New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals
• Citation: Slate v. Schiavone Const. Co., 829 N.E.2d 665, 4 N.Y.3d 816, 796 N.Y.S.2d 573 (N.Y. 2005)
• Decision Date: 29 March 2005
• Parties: John SLATE, Respondent, v. SCHIAVONE CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, Appellant.

Page 665

829 N.E.2d 665

4 N.Y.3d 816

John SLATE, Respondent, v. SCHIAVONE CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, Appellant.

Court of Appeals of New York.

March 29, 2005.

Wilson, Elser, Moskowtiz, Edelman & Dicker LLP, New York City (Richard E. Lerner, of counsel), for appellant.

Cascione Purcigliotti & Galluzzi, P.C., New York City (Thomas G. Cascione, of counsel), for respondent.

MEMORANDUM.

The order of the Appellate Division should be reversed, with costs, defendant's motion to dismiss the complaint granted and the certified question answered in the negative. In view of the extreme lack of diligence shown by plaintiff, and the long delay (more than a year and a half after running of the statute of limitations) before defendant received any notice of the action, the courts below abused their discretion in granting plaintiff an extension to serve defendant "in the interest of justice" pursuant to CPLR 306-b (see Leader v. Maroney, Ponzini & Spencer, 97 N.Y.2d 95, 105-106, 736 N.Y.S.2d 291, 761 N.E.2d 1018 (2001)).

Chief Judge KAYE and Judges G.B. SMITH, CIPARICK, ROSENBLATT, G...