Wold v. City of N.Y.
| Decision Date | 07 June 2011 |
| Citation | 2011 N.Y. Slip Op. 05052,85 A.D.3d 776,924 N.Y.S.2d 829 |
| Parties | Charles WOLD, appellant,v.CITY OF NEW YORK, respondent. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HEREThe Berkman Law Office, LLC, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Robert J. Tolchin and Daniel Shimko of counsel), for appellant.
[924 N.Y.S.2d 830 , 85 A.D.3d 776]
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Flug, J.), entered September 22, 2010, as, upon reargument, adhered to its original determination in an order dated April 17, 2007, denying those branches of his motion which were to vacate the dismissal of the action pursuant to CPLR 3216, to restore the action to active status, and to extend the time to file a note of issue, and, sua sponte, dismissed the action pursuant to 22 NYCRR 202.27.
ORDERED that the appeal from so much of the order as, sua sponte, dismissed the action pursuant to 22 NYCRR 202.27 is dismissed, without costs or disbursements, as no appeal lies as of right from an order which does not determine a motion made on notice, and we decline to grant leave to appeal ( see CPLR 5701[a][2]; Wright v. Stam, 81 A.D.3d 721, 721–722, 916 N.Y.S.2d 520); and it is further,
ORDERED that order is affirmed insofar as reviewed, without costs or disbursements.
The compliance conference order dated June 16, 1998, directing the plaintiff to file a note of issue within 90 days and warning that the action could be dismissed if the plaintiff failed to comply, had the same effect as a 90–day notice pursuant to CPLR 3216 ( see Hoffman v. Kessler, 28 A.D.3d 718, 816 N.Y.S.2d 481; Rezene v. Williams, 22 A.D.3d 656, 804 N.Y.S.2d 335; C & S Realty, Inc. v. Soloff, 22 A.D.3d 515, 801 N.Y.S.2d 772). In light of the plaintiff's failure to comply with that order either by filing a timely note of issue or by moving to extend the period for doing so, the action was properly dismissed pursuant to CPLR 3216 on January 22, 1999 ( see Felix v. County of Nassau, 52 A.D.3d 653, 654, 860 N.Y.S.2d 196; Giannoccoli v. One Cent. Park W. Assoc., 15 A.D.3d 348, 349, 790 N.Y.S.2d 159; Werbin v. Locicero, 287 A.D.2d 617, 617–618, 732 N.Y.S.2d 37). The plaintiff failed to move to vacate the dismissal within one year ( see CPLR 5015[a] [1]; Lopez v. Imperial Delivery Serv., 282 A.D.2d 190, 197, 725 N.Y.S.2d 57). Accordingly, upon reargument, the Supreme Court properly adhered to its original determination denying those branches of the plaintiff's ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Bambrick v. City of New York
...default must be made within one year of service of notice of entry of the order (see CPLR 5015[a][1] ; Wold v. City of New York, 85 A.D.3d 776, 777, 924 N.Y.S.2d 829 ). Here, the plaintiff was served on February 1, 2019, with notice of entry of the order of dismissal, but he did not move to......
-
Winter v. Brown
...359; Vintage, LLC v. Laws Constr. Corp., 13 N.Y.3d 847, 849–850, 892 N.Y.S.2d 286, 920 N.E.2d 342). In any event, the undisputed evidence [85 A.D.3d 776] established that the defendants failed to pay Winter the full amount due to him under the agreement on December 15, 2005, for the quarter......
-
Feldman v. Delaney
...was not made within one year after service of a copy of the order with notice of entry ( see CPLR 5015[a][1]; Wold v. City of New York, 85 A.D.3d 776, 777, 924 N.Y.S.2d 829; Valentin v. City of New York, 73 A.D.3d 755, 756, 899 N.Y.S.2d 651; Cazeau v. Paul, 2 A.D.3d 477, 478, 767 N.Y.S.2d 8......
-
People v. Valera
...A.D.3d 828924 N.Y.S.2d 8292011 N.Y. Slip Op. 05108The PEOPLE, etc., respondent,v.Anthony VALERA, appellant.Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.June 7, John M. McGlynn, Rockville Centre, N.Y., for appellant.Francis D. Phillips II, District Attorney, Goshen, N.Y. (R......