Kommeh v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Kommeh v. City of New York

96 A.D.3d 476, 946 N.Y.S.2d 152

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

DecidedJune 7, 2012

StatusPublished

This text of 96 A.D.3d 476 (Kommeh v. City of New York) 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

Kommeh v. City of New York, 96 A.D.3d 476, 946 N.Y.S.2d 152 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2012).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Geoffrey D. Wright, J.), entered May 10, 2011, which denied plaintiff’s motion to vacate his default and granted defendant City of New York’s cross motion to dismiss the complaint, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, plaintiffs motion granted, defendant’s motion denied, and the complaint reinstated.

Plaintiff provided a reasonable excuse for failure to appear at the preliminary conference and failure to timely serve a complaint (see Goodwin v New York City Hous. Auth., 78 AD3d 550 [2010]), based on his prior attorney’s neglect of matters entrusted to him and subsequent disbarment (see Matter of Siskin, 78 AD3d 112 [2010]). Plaintiff’s affidavit and accompanying documentation adequately demonstrate the merit of this action for personal injuries suffered by plaintiff when he was walking across the street and was hit by a police car that was traveling in the wrong direction without using lights or sirens (see Parker v Alacantara, 79 AD3d 429 [2010]). Under [477]*477these circumstances and in view of the strong public policy favoring resolution of cases on the merits (see Chevalier v 368 E. 148th St. Assoc., LLC, 80 AD3d 411, 413-414 [2011]), the motion court improvidently exercised its discretion in failing to restore this matter to the trial calendar. Concur — Tom, J.P., Andrias, Moskowitz, Acosta and Abdus-Salaam, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Geoffrey D. Wright, J.), entered May 10, 2011, which denied plaintiff’s motion to vacate his default and granted defendant City of New York’s cross motion to dismiss the complaint, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, plaintiffs motion granted, defendant’s motion denied, and the complaint reinstated.

Plaintiff provided a reasonable excuse for failure to appear at the preliminary conference and failure to timely serve a complaint (see Goodwin v New York City Hous. Auth., 78 AD3d 550 [2010]), based on his prior attorney’s neglect of matters entrusted to him and subsequent disbarment (see Matter of Siskin, 78 AD3d 112 [2010]). Plaintiff’s affidavit and accompanying documentation adequately demonstrate the merit of this action for personal injuries suffered by plaintiff when he was walking across the street and was hit by a police car that was traveling in the wrong direction without using lights or sirens (see Parker v Alacantara, 79 AD3d 429 [2010]). Under [477]*477these circumstances and in view of the strong public policy favoring resolution of cases on the merits (see Chevalier v 368 E. 148th St. Assoc., LLC, 80 AD3d 411, 413-414 [2011]), the motion court improvidently exercised its discretion in failing to restore this matter to the trial calendar. Concur — Tom, J.P., Andrias, Moskowitz, Acosta and Abdus-Salaam, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

96 A.D.3d 476, 946 N.Y.S.2d 152, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kommeh-v-city-of-new-york-nyappdiv-2012.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack