N & N Restaurant Corp. v. MPF Associates, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

N & N Restaurant Corp. v. MPF Associates, Inc.

292 A.D.2d 432, 738 N.Y.S.2d 887, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2520

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

DecidedMarch 11, 2002

StatusPublished

This text of 292 A.D.2d 432 (N & N Restaurant Corp. v. MPF Associates, Inc.) 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

N & N Restaurant Corp. v. MPF Associates, Inc., 292 A.D.2d 432, 738 N.Y.S.2d 887, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2520 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for negligence, the defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Coppola, J.), entered July 13, 2001, which granted the plaintiff’s motion for leave to reargue, vacated a prior order of the same court, dated February 27, 2001, dismissing the complaint, and reinstated the note of issue.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The court providently granted reargument and vacated its order of dismissal, reinstating the note of issue. The plaintiff timely served its note of issue within 90 days pursuant to the defendants’ demand and filed it only three days later. This short delay in filing does not merit the drastic remedy of dismissal (see, Schaffer v Route Messenger Serv., 65 AD2d 809). Prudenti, P.J., Florio, S. Miller, Friedmann and Adams, JJ., concur.

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

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for negligence, the defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Coppola, J.), entered July 13, 2001, which granted the plaintiff’s motion for leave to reargue, vacated a prior order of the same court, dated February 27, 2001, dismissing the complaint, and reinstated the note of issue.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The court providently granted reargument and vacated its order of dismissal, reinstating the note of issue. The plaintiff timely served its note of issue within 90 days pursuant to the defendants’ demand and filed it only three days later. This short delay in filing does not merit the drastic remedy of dismissal (see, Schaffer v Route Messenger Serv., 65 AD2d 809). Prudenti, P.J., Florio, S. Miller, Friedmann and Adams, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

292 A.D.2d 432, 738 N.Y.S.2d 887, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2520, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/n-n-restaurant-corp-v-mpf-associates-inc-nyappdiv-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack