Beltrez v. Chambliss
68 A.D.3d 681, 890 N.Y.2d 825
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided December 29, 2009·Published
Opinion
Plaintiff failed to demonstrate that she had a reasonable excuse for her delay in serving the complaint after defendants served their demand for it and a meritorious cause of action [682]*682(CPLR 3012 [b], [d]; see e.g. Jee Foo Realty Corp. v Lemle, 259 AD2d 401 [1999]).
Contrary to plaintiff’s contention, service of the demand extended defendants’ time to appear in the action until 20 days after plaintiff served her complaint (CPLR 3012 [b]). Concur— Andrias, J.P., Friedman, Acosta, DeGrasse and Román, JJ.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Beltrez v. Chambliss, 68 A.D.3d 681, 890 N.Y.2d 825 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2009).
68 A.D.3d 681 (Beltrez v. Chambliss) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Jee Foo Realty Corp. v. Lemle
259 A.D.2d 401 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1999)