Buffolino v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Buffolino v. City of New York

92 A.D.3d 633, 937 N.Y.2d 871

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided February 7, 2012·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinion

The Supreme Court properly denied, as untimely, the summary judgment motion of the defendant Stephanie Cho, which was made returnable six days beyond the deadline fixed by the Supreme Court in a so-ordered stipulation dated November 30, 2010, as she failed to demonstrate good cause for the delay (see CPLR 2004, 3212 [a]; Brill v City of New York, 2 NY3d 648, 652 [2004]; Van Dyke v Skanska USA Civ. Northeast, Inc., 83 AD3d 1049 [2011]).

In light of the foregoing, we need not reach the parties’ [634] remaining contentions. Florio, J.E, Chambers, Hall and Miller, JJ., concur.

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

The Supreme Court properly denied, as untimely, the summary judgment motion of the defendant Stephanie Cho, which was made returnable six days beyond the deadline fixed by the Supreme Court in a so-ordered stipulation dated November 30, 2010, as she failed to demonstrate good cause for the delay (see CPLR 2004, 3212 [a]; Brill v City of New York, 2 NY3d 648, 652 [2004]; Van Dyke v Skanska USA Civ. Northeast, Inc., 83 AD3d 1049 [2011]).

In light of the foregoing, we need not reach the parties’ [634] remaining contentions. Florio, J.E, Chambers, Hall and Miller, JJ., concur.

Buffolino v. City of New York, 92 A.D.3d 633, 937 N.Y.2d 871 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2012).

Pincite

92 A.D.3d 633 (Buffolino v. City of New York) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related