Manhattan King David Restaurant, Inc. v. Nathanson

269 A.D.2d 297, 703 N.Y.S.2d 43, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2039
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedFebruary 24, 2000
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 269 A.D.2d 297 (Manhattan King David Restaurant, Inc. v. Nathanson) 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
Manhattan King David Restaurant, Inc. v. Nathanson, 269 A.D.2d 297, 703 N.Y.S.2d 43, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2039 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Harold Tompkins, J.), entered August 7, 1998, which granted defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint and to impose sanctions against the individual plaintiff, and denied plaintiffs’ cross motion to compel defendants’ acceptance of an untimely served complaint, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

The complaint was properly dismissed for failure to show a reasonable excuse for the two and a half-month delay in serving it and a meritorious cause of action (CPLR 3012 [b]; see, A & J Concrete Corp. v Arker, 54 NY2d 870). Defendants’ retention of the complaint was not a waiver of the untimely service, at least where their motion to dismiss was made only some three weeks after receiving the complaint in the mail (cf., Steen v New Deal Delivery Serv., 79 AD2d 963, 964, affd 54 NY2d 796). A $2,500 sanction was properly imposed against the individual plaintiff in view of his failure to comply with a Second Circuit sanction order insofar as it directed him to present a copy thereof to any court in the Circuit, whether State or Federal, in which he was pursuing litigation, tactics that were intended to delay, and unjustifiable litigiousness against these defendants. Concur — Sullivan, P. J., Nardelli, Wallach, Lerner and Buckley, JJ.

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

Related

Round Hill Music, LP v. Simmons
2024 NY Slip Op 30481(U) (New York Supreme Court, New York County, 2024)
Amodeo v. Gellert & Quartararo, P.C.
26 A.D.3d 705 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2006)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
269 A.D.2d 297, 703 N.Y.S.2d 43, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2039, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/manhattan-king-david-restaurant-inc-v-nathanson-nyappdiv-2000.