Richter v. Dunlap

214 A.D.2d 983, 627 N.Y.S.2d 604, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6720
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided April 28, 1995·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Order unanimously reversed on the law without costs, motion granted and complaint dismissed. Memorandum: Supreme Court erred in denying defen[984]*984dants’ motion. Plaintiff failed to provide a sufficient excuse for her failure to file a note of issue within the 90-day demand period (see, Terry v Southern Container, 214 AD2d 983 [decided herewith]; Franck v CNY Anesthesia Group, 175 AD2d 605; MacLeod v Nolte, 106 AD2d 860; Barnard v Tops Friendly Mkts., 99 AD2d 654), and her attorney’s affidavit, which contained only conclusory allegations of merit, is insufficient to demonstrate a meritorious cause of action (see, Terry v Southern Container, supra; Freer v Black, 175 AD2d 577, lv denied 78 NY2d 862; Zent v Board of Educ., 174 AD2d 1047, 1048). (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Niagara County, Mintz, J.—Dismiss Complaint.) Present—Denman, P. J., Law-ton, Wesley, Balio and Davis, JJ.

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

Richter v. Dunlap, 214 A.D.2d 983, 627 N.Y.S.2d 604, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6720 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

214 A.D.2d 983 (Richter v. Dunlap) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Middleton v. John Luther & Son
237 A.D.2d 953 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1997)
Terry v. Southern Container
214 A.D.2d 983 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1995)