Anderson v. Kantares

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Anderson v. Kantares

51 A.D.3d 954, 857 N.Y.S.2d 511

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedMay 27, 2008

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 51 A.D.3d 954 (Anderson v. Kantares) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Anderson v. Kantares, 51 A.D.3d 954, 857 N.Y.S.2d 511 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2008).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Satterfield, J.), dated January 4, 2007, which granted the motion of the defendant Helen Minadis for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against her.

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, and the motion of the defendant Helen Minadis for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against her is denied.

The Supreme Court erred in entertaining the motion of the defendant Helen Minadis (hereinafter the defendant) for summary judgment, which was made returnable 29 days beyond the deadline fixed by the Supreme Court in the so-ordered stipulation, where she failed to demonstrate good cause for the delay (see CPLR 3212 [a]; Brill v City of New York, 2 NY3d 648, 652 [2004]; DiBenedetto v Lowe’s Home Ctrs., Inc., 43 AD3d 853 [2007]). The testimony of the nonparty witness, whose deposition transcript the defendant was reportedly awaiting, was not relevant to the defendant’s motion (see Jackson v Jamaica First Parking, LLC, 49 AD3d 501 [2008]; Tower Ins. Co. of N.Y. v Razy Assoc., 37 AD3d 702, 703 [2007]; Espejo v Hiro Real Estate Co., 19 AD3d 360, 361 [2005]). Accordingly, the Supreme Court erred in reaching the merits of the motion (see Brill v City of New York, 2 NY3d at 650). Rivera, J.E, Spolzino, Dickerson and Eng, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Satterfield, J.), dated January 4, 2007, which granted the motion of the defendant Helen Minadis for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against her.

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, and the motion of the defendant Helen Minadis for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against her is denied.

The Supreme Court erred in entertaining the motion of the defendant Helen Minadis (hereinafter the defendant) for summary judgment, which was made returnable 29 days beyond the deadline fixed by the Supreme Court in the so-ordered stipulation, where she failed to demonstrate good cause for the delay (see CPLR 3212 [a]; Brill v City of New York, 2 NY3d 648, 652 [2004]; DiBenedetto v Lowe’s Home Ctrs., Inc., 43 AD3d 853 [2007]). The testimony of the nonparty witness, whose deposition transcript the defendant was reportedly awaiting, was not relevant to the defendant’s motion (see Jackson v Jamaica First Parking, LLC, 49 AD3d 501 [2008]; Tower Ins. Co. of N.Y. v Razy Assoc., 37 AD3d 702, 703 [2007]; Espejo v Hiro Real Estate Co., 19 AD3d 360, 361 [2005]). Accordingly, the Supreme Court erred in reaching the merits of the motion (see Brill v City of New York, 2 NY3d at 650). Rivera, J.E, Spolzino, Dickerson and Eng, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

51 A.D.3d 954, 857 N.Y.S.2d 511, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/anderson-v-kantares-nyappdiv-2008.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack