Gibbs v. McRide Cab Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Gibbs v. McRide Cab Co.

10 A.D.3d 671, 781 N.Y.S.2d 747, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10950

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

DecidedSeptember 20, 2004

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 10 A.D.3d 671 (Gibbs v. McRide Cab 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

Gibbs v. McRide Cab Co., 10 A.D.3d 671, 781 N.Y.S.2d 747, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10950 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Phelan, J.), dated August 14, 2003, as granted the motion of the defendant McRide Cab Co. for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against it.

Ordered that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, with costs, the motion is denied, and the complaint is reinstated insofar as asserted against the defendant McRide Cab Co.

The motion of the defendant McRide Cab Co. for summary judgment, made almost six months after the note of issue was filed, failed to comply with the requirements of CPLR 3212 (a). The absence of prejudice to the plaintiff did not constitute good cause for the delay (see Brill v City of New York, 2 NY3d 648 [2004]). Smith, J.P., Krausman, Crane and Spolzino, JJ., concur.

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

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Phelan, J.), dated August 14, 2003, as granted the motion of the defendant McRide Cab Co. for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against it.

Ordered that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, with costs, the motion is denied, and the complaint is reinstated insofar as asserted against the defendant McRide Cab Co.

The motion of the defendant McRide Cab Co. for summary judgment, made almost six months after the note of issue was filed, failed to comply with the requirements of CPLR 3212 (a). The absence of prejudice to the plaintiff did not constitute good cause for the delay (see Brill v City of New York, 2 NY3d 648 [2004]). Smith, J.P., Krausman, Crane and Spolzino, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

10 A.D.3d 671, 781 N.Y.S.2d 747, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10950, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gibbs-v-mcride-cab-co-nyappdiv-2004.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack