Slate v. Schiavone Construction Company
This text of 829 N.E.2d 665 (Slate v. Schiavone Construction Company) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
The order of the Appellate Division should be reversed, with costs, defendant’s motion to dismiss the complaint granted and the certified question answered in the negative. In view of the extreme lack of diligence shown by plaintiff, and the long delay (more than a year and a half after running of the statute of limitations) before defendant received any notice of the action, the courts below abused their discretion in granting plaintiff an extension to serve defendant “in the interest of justice” pursuant to CPLR 306-b (see Leader v Maroney, Ponzini & Spencer, 97 NY2d 95, 105-106 [2001]).
Chief Judge Kaye and Judges G.B. Smith, Ciparick, Rosenblatt, Graffeo, Read and R.S. Smith concur in memorandum.
On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.4 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.4), order reversed, etc.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
829 N.E.2d 665, 4 N.Y.3d 816, 796 N.Y.S.2d 573, 2005 N.Y. LEXIS 500, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/slate-v-schiavone-construction-company-ny-2005.