Cazeau v. Paul

2 A.D.3d 477, 767 N.Y.S.2d 895
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedDecember 8, 2003
StatusPublished
Cited by6 cases

This text of 2 A.D.3d 477 (Cazeau v. Paul) 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
Cazeau v. Paul, 2 A.D.3d 477, 767 N.Y.S.2d 895 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2003).

Opinion

[478]*478In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Huttner, J.), dated August 29, 2002, which denied his motion to restore the action to the trial calendar.

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, the motion is granted, and the action is restored to the trial calendar.

A case dismissed pursuant to 22 NYCRR 202.27 may be restored only if the plaintiff can demonstrate both a reasonable excuse for the default and a meritorious cause of action (see CPLR 5015 [a] [1]; Lopez v Imperial Delivery Serv., 282 AD2d 190, 197 [2001]). Such a motion must be made within one year after service of the order or judgment entered upon the default (see CPLR 5015 [a] [1]). In this case, the plaintiff made a timely motion to restore the action to the trial calendar. In addition, the plaintiff set forth a meritorious cause of action in his affidavit of merit, and the temporary inability of counsel to contact his client constituted a reasonable excuse for the default. Ritter, J.P., Smith, Friedmann, H. Miller and Crane, JJ., concur.

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

Related

US Bank National Association, as Trustee for Credit
140 A.D.3d 1578 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2016)
US Bank National Ass'n v. Thurm
140 A.D.3d 1578 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2016)
Feldman v. Delaney
94 A.D.3d 1043 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2012)
Brown v. Vanchieri
64 A.D.3d 678 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2009)
M.S. Hi-Tech, Inc. v. Thompson
23 A.D.3d 442 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2005)
Kahlke v. Buscemi
12 A.D.3d 488 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2004)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2 A.D.3d 477, 767 N.Y.S.2d 895, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cazeau-v-paul-nyappdiv-2003.