Molla v. Alam

Opinion

Mofizur Molla, Respondent, April 6, 2016

against

Shamsul Alam, Appellant.

Appeal from an order of the District Court of Suffolk County, First District (Vincent J. Martorana, J.), dated July 18, 2014. The order denied defendant's motion for leave to file a late demand for a trial de novo.

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, without costs.

Following mandatory arbitration (see Rules of the Chief Judge [22 NYCRR] part 28) in this action based on a claim for property damage, defendant moved for leave to file a late demand for a trial de novo (see Rules of the Chief Judge [22 NYCRR] § 28.12). By order dated July 18, 2014, the District Court denied the motion.

As defendant failed either to serve or to file a timely demand for a trial de novo, his "motion was properly denied, since [t]he time period to serve and file a demand for a trial de novo is not extendable' " (Citibank (SD), N.A. v Boyce , 44 Misc 3d 128[A], 2014 NY Slip Op 50981[U], *1 [App Term, 2d Dept, 9th & 10th Jud Dists 2014], quoting U.S. Building and Design Inc. v Melia, 2003 NY Slip Op 50847[U], *2 [App Term, 2d Dept, 9th & 10th Jud Dists 2003]; see Chase v Scalici, 97 AD2d 25 [1983]; cf. Rules of the Chief Judge [22 NYCRR] § 28.12 [b]).

Accordingly, the order is affirmed.

Marano, P.J., Iannacci and Garguilo, JJ., concur.

Decision Date: April 06, 2016