Brown v. AP & ASBP Holding Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Brown v. AP & ASBP Holding Co.

22 A.D.3d 416, 803 N.Y.S.2d 55

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

DecidedOctober 27, 2005

StatusPublished

This text of 22 A.D.3d 416 (Brown v. AP & ASBP Holding Co.) 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

Brown v. AP & ASBP Holding Co., 22 A.D.3d 416, 803 N.Y.S.2d 55 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Shirley Werner Kornreich, J.), entered on or about July 9, 2005, which denied plaintiffs’ motion to vacate a prior order dismissing the action pursuant to 22 NYCRR 202.27 and to restore the action to the appropriate pre-note of issue calendar, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The motion was properly denied on the ground that plaintiffs’ attorney failed to offer a reasonable excuse for his failure to appear at three consecutive compliance conferences (see Campos v New York City Health & Hosps. Corp., 307 AD2d 785 [2003]). It was not incumbent on plaintiffs’ attorney’s adversary to serve the prior order with notice of entry, or otherwise advise plaintiffs that the action had been dismissed (cf. id.). Furthermore, plaintiffs’ affidavit of merit, first offered in their reply, is not persuasive. Concur—Friedman, J.P., Marlow, Gonzalez and Catterson, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Shirley Werner Kornreich, J.), entered on or about July 9, 2005, which denied plaintiffs’ motion to vacate a prior order dismissing the action pursuant to 22 NYCRR 202.27 and to restore the action to the appropriate pre-note of issue calendar, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The motion was properly denied on the ground that plaintiffs’ attorney failed to offer a reasonable excuse for his failure to appear at three consecutive compliance conferences (see Campos v New York City Health & Hosps. Corp., 307 AD2d 785 [2003]). It was not incumbent on plaintiffs’ attorney’s adversary to serve the prior order with notice of entry, or otherwise advise plaintiffs that the action had been dismissed (cf. id.). Furthermore, plaintiffs’ affidavit of merit, first offered in their reply, is not persuasive. Concur—Friedman, J.P., Marlow, Gonzalez and Catterson, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

22 A.D.3d 416, 803 N.Y.S.2d 55, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/brown-v-ap-asbp-holding-co-nyappdiv-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack