From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Esposito v. Isaac

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Dec 8, 2009
68 A.D.3d 483 (N.Y. App. Div. 2009)

Summary

upholding dismissal of claims against Isaac

Summary of this case from Esposito v. Chestnut

Opinion

No. 1689.

December 8, 2009.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Doris Ling-Cohan, J.), entered October 9, 2008, which denied defendant Allen H. Isaac's motion to reject so much of a referee's report as found that plaintiff established grounds for an extension of time to serve the complaint, and confirmed the report in its entirety, unanimously reversed, on the law and the facts, without costs, and the motion granted. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment in favor of defendant dismissing the complaint as against him.

Gordon Rees LLP, New York (Diane Krebs of counsel), for appellant.

Luisa Castagna Esposito, respondent pro se.

Before: Andrias, J.P., Saxe, Sweeny, Moskowitz and Abdus-Salaam, JJ.


Plaintiff failed to satisfy the criteria for an extension of time to serve either upon good cause shown or in the interest of justice ( see CPLR 306-b; Leader v Maroney, Ponzini Spencer, 97 NY2d 95, 103-104). As to good cause, plaintiff failed to demonstrate, diligence in effecting service ( see Leader at 105). The referee found that the process server "at best, was sloppy, and at worst, was untruthful." And, having provided an incorrect address for defendant, plaintiff appears to have made insufficient efforts to locate the correct address.

As to the interest of justice standard, while plaintiff moved promptly for an extension of time in response to defendant's motion to dismiss, she failed to show either that her cause of action was meritorious or that there was no prejudice to defendant ( see Leader at 105-106). There is no evidence that defendant had notice of the action at any time before the end of the 120-day period for making service ( see Yardeni v Manhattan Eye, Ear Throat Hosp., 9 AD3d 296, 297-298, lv denied 4 NY3d 704). In light of the foregoing, the fact that the statute of limitations has expired does not warrant an extension ( see Leader at 107; Okoh v Bunis, 48 AD3d 357).


Summaries of

Esposito v. Isaac

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Dec 8, 2009
68 A.D.3d 483 (N.Y. App. Div. 2009)

upholding dismissal of claims against Isaac

Summary of this case from Esposito v. Chestnut
Case details for

Esposito v. Isaac

Case Details

Full title:LUISA C. ESPOSITO, Respondent, v. ALLEN H. ISAAC, Appellant, et al.…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: Dec 8, 2009

Citations

68 A.D.3d 483 (N.Y. App. Div. 2009)
2009 N.Y. Slip Op. 9079
888 N.Y.S.2d 889

Citing Cases

Nicodene v. Byblos Rest., Inc.

Extensions based upon the interests of justice have been denied where there is a showing of an extreme lack…

Postawa v. David

The Court thus denies the motion by the plaintiff to grant an extension of time, pursuant to CPLR 306-b, to…