Coaxum v. Nor-Topia Service Station, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Coaxum v. Nor-Topia Service Station, Inc.

101 A.D.3d 485, 954 N.Y.2d 870

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided December 13, 2012·Published

Opinion

The motion court correctly determined that the order dismissing plaintiffs complaint under Bronx County index No. 28626/ 2001 was for failure to prosecute, as evidenced by plaintiffs willful and contumacious disregard for the court’s discovery orders (Perez v New York City Hous. Auth.) 302 AD2d 210 [1st Dept 2003]). Accordingly, plaintiff’s second complaint, filed under Bronx County index No. 309385/09, was barred by CPLR 205 (a) and properly dismissed by the motion court.

We have considered plaintiffs remaining arguments and find them unavailing. Concur — Gonzalez, P.J., Mazzarelli, Acosta and Román, JJ.

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

The motion court correctly determined that the order dismissing plaintiffs complaint under Bronx County index No. 28626/ 2001 was for failure to prosecute, as evidenced by plaintiffs willful and contumacious disregard for the court’s discovery orders (Perez v New York City Hous. Auth.) 302 AD2d 210 [1st Dept 2003]). Accordingly, plaintiff’s second complaint, filed under Bronx County index No. 309385/09, was barred by CPLR 205 (a) and properly dismissed by the motion court.

We have considered plaintiffs remaining arguments and find them unavailing. Concur — Gonzalez, P.J., Mazzarelli, Acosta and Román, JJ.

Coaxum v. Nor-Topia Service Station, Inc., 101 A.D.3d 485, 954 N.Y.2d 870 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2012).

Pincite

101 A.D.3d 485 (Coaxum v. Nor-Topia Service Station, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related