Martorello v. Consolidated Edison Co.

260 A.D.2d 317, 689 N.Y.S.2d 82, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4369
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided April 29, 1999·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Lorraine Miller, J.), entered October 16, 1998, which denied defendant’s motion [318] for leave to make a motion for summary judgment more than 120 days after the filing of a note of issue, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The motion was properly denied absent an explanation why it was not made at the time that defendant moved to vacate the note of issue on the ground that plaintiff had failed to comply with all outstanding disclosure demands. Moreover, there is no showing that plaintiffs dilatory conduct in providing disclosure prevented defendant from moving for summary judgment. Concur — Nardelli, J. P., Tom, Lerner, Mazzarelli and Friedman, JJ.

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

Martorello v. Consolidated Edison Co., 260 A.D.2d 317, 689 N.Y.S.2d 82, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4369 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

260 A.D.2d 317 (Martorello v. Consolidated Edison Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Hernandez v. 620 West 189th Ltd. Partnership
7 Misc. 3d 198 (New York Supreme Court, 2005)
Diaz v. Altman
298 A.D.2d 126 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2002)