Swartz v. 234-6 22nd Street Corp.

305 A.D.2d 336, 759 N.Y.S.2d 654, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6114

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Leland DeGrasse, J.), entered on or about March 27, 2002, which denied plaintiff’s motion to restore the action to the calendar and for summary judgment and granted defendants’ cross motion to dismiss the complaint pursuant to CPLR 3404, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The motion to restore was properly denied for failure to show a reasonable excuse for the delay in moving to restore, an intent not to abandon the action and lack of prejudice to defendants (see Burgos v 2915 Surf Ave. Food Mart, 298 AD2d 282, 283 [2002]). Nor is plaintiff entitled to summary judgment. We have considered plaintiffs other arguments and find them unavailing. Concur — Nardelli, J.P., Saxe, Sullivan, Wallach and Williams, JJ.

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

Swartz v. 234-6 22nd Street Corp., 305 A.D.2d 336, 759 N.Y.S.2d 654, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6114 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2003).

305 A.D.2d 336 (Swartz v. 234-6 22nd Street Corp.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Burgos v. 2915 Surf Ave. Food Mart, Inc.
298 A.D.2d 282 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2002)