Santucci v. Pearsall

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Santucci v. Pearsall

99 A.D.2d 775, 472 N.Y.S.2d 26, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 17157

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

DecidedFebruary 14, 1984

StatusPublished

This text of 99 A.D.2d 775 (Santucci v. Pearsall) 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

Santucci v. Pearsall, 99 A.D.2d 775, 472 N.Y.S.2d 26, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 17157 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1984).

Pincite

Opinion

— In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Leggett, J.), entered December 14, 1982, which denied her motion to dismiss plaintiffs’ action for failure to prosecute. Order reversed, on the law, with costs, motion granted, and action dismissed. Plaintiffs failed to comply with a 90-day notice served upon them pursuant to CPLR 3216. They also did not seek to extend the time to comply or to vacate the notice. In opposing the instant motion to dismiss, made in August, 1982, four months after service of the 90-day notice, plaintiffs failed to furnish an affidavit of merit. In light of the delay in filing the note of issue, such an affidavit was mandatory. Its omission necessitates the granting of this motion (see, e.g., LaBuda v Brookhaven Mem. Hosp. Med. Center, 98 AD2d 711; Savino v Guido, 81 AD2d 860). Titone, J. P., Mangano, Gibbons and Brown, JJ., concur.

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

— In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Leggett, J.), entered December 14, 1982, which denied her motion to dismiss plaintiffs’ action for failure to prosecute. Order reversed, on the law, with costs, motion granted, and action dismissed. Plaintiffs failed to comply with a 90-day notice served upon them pursuant to CPLR 3216. They also did not seek to extend the time to comply or to vacate the notice. In opposing the instant motion to dismiss, made in August, 1982, four months after service of the 90-day notice, plaintiffs failed to furnish an affidavit of merit. In light of the delay in filing the note of issue, such an affidavit was mandatory. Its omission necessitates the granting of this motion (see, e.g., LaBuda v Brookhaven Mem. Hosp. Med. Center, 98 AD2d 711; Savino v Guido, 81 AD2d 860). Titone, J. P., Mangano, Gibbons and Brown, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

99 A.D.2d 775, 472 N.Y.S.2d 26, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 17157, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/santucci-v-pearsall-nyappdiv-1984.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack