Seven Acre Wood Street Associates, Inc. v. Petruccelli Engineering

3 A.D.3d 396, 769 N.Y.S.2d 902, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 331
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJanuary 15, 2004
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 3 A.D.3d 396 (Seven Acre Wood Street Associates, Inc. v. Petruccelli Engineering) 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
Seven Acre Wood Street Associates, Inc. v. Petruccelli Engineering, 3 A.D.3d 396, 769 N.Y.S.2d 902, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 331 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2004).

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Barbara Kapnick, J.), entered on or about July 3, 2002, which, inter alia, granted plaintiffs cross motion to vacate a self-executing order of preclusion against it on the condition that plaintiff’s counsel pay defendants’ counsel $1,500, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Inasmuch as plaintiff demonstrated a meritorious cause of action and a reasonable excuse for its default in timely complying with the discovery directives in the subject order of preclusion, [397]*397plaintiffs cross motion to vacate the self-executing preclusion order was properly granted (see CPLR 5015 [a] [1]; Fernandez v Tsoumpas Bros. Co., 140 AD2d 257 [1988]; cf. Clarke v United Parcel Serv., 300 AD2d 614 [2002]; Tejeda v 750 Gerard Props. Corp., 272 AD2d 124 [2000]). Plaintiffs default was not willful and its submission of its responses to defendants’ discovery demands, albeit after an 18-day delay, demonstrated its good faith intent to prosecute the action. Any prejudice to defendants by reason of plaintiffs late compliance was adequately addressed by the court’s provision conditioning the grant of plaintiff’s cross motion upon payment of $1,500 to defendants’ counsel (see Heffney v Brookdale Hosp. Ctr., 102 AD2d 842 [1984], appeal dismissed 63 NY2d 770 [1984]; Maglieri v Saks, 33 AD2d 898 [1970]). Concur—Tom, J.P., Williams, Marlow and Gonzalez, JJ.

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

Related

Gradaille v. City of New York
52 A.D.3d 279 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2008)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
3 A.D.3d 396, 769 N.Y.S.2d 902, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 331, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/seven-acre-wood-street-associates-inc-v-petruccelli-engineering-nyappdiv-2004.