Rascoe v. Clark

65 A.D.2d 876, 410 N.Y.S.2d 392, 1978 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13779
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedNovember 16, 1978
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 65 A.D.2d 876 (Rascoe v. Clark) 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
Rascoe v. Clark, 65 A.D.2d 876, 410 N.Y.S.2d 392, 1978 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13779 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1978).

Opinion

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court at Special Term, entered November 17, 1977 in Albany County, which conditionally dismissed the action against defendant Fasulo unless plaintiff served a complaint upon the attorneys for Fasulo within 10 [877]*877days. This action was commenced against defendant Fasulo by the service of a summons upon her on September 22, 1975. On December 9, 1975 defendant Fasulo served a notice of appearance and demand for a complaint upon plaintiffs attorney. Since no complaint was received for approximately 20 months, defendant Fasulo moved, pursuant to CPLR 3012 (subd [b]), to dismiss the action for failure to serve a complaint. Special Term conditionally dismissed the action unless plaintiff served a complaint on defendant Fasulo’s attorneys within 10 days. On this appeal it is contended by defendant Fasulo that her motion should have been granted unconditionally. Although plaintiff alleges on appeal that her attorney appeared on the motion, the order being appealed from recites that no one appeared in opposition to defendant’s motion. In any event, no papers were submitted in opposition. Plaintiffs failure to offer a satisfactory excuse for the lengthy delay and her failure to submit an affidavit of merits requires a modification of the order on appeal and the unconditional dismissal of the action as against defendant Fasulo (Hanley v Callanan Inds., 60 AD2d 706). Order modified, on the law and the facts, by striking so much thereof as conditionally grants defendant Fasulo’s motion to dismiss and by providing that the motion is granted unconditionally, and, as so modified, affirmed, without costs. Mahoney, P. J., Sweeney, Kane, Larkin and Herlihy, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Gilmartin v. Northeast Bronx Hillside Corp.
70 A.D.2d 519 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1979)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
65 A.D.2d 876, 410 N.Y.S.2d 392, 1978 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13779, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rascoe-v-clark-nyappdiv-1978.