Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Lucia Hernandez, As Administratrix For Sonia Garcia, Etc., et al., Plaintiffs-Respondents v. Alex Chaparro

New York Supreme and/or Appellate Courts Appellate Division, First Department


May 29, 2012

LUCIA HERNANDEZ, AS ADMINISTRATRIX FOR SONIA GARCIA, ETC., ET AL., PLAINTIFFS-RESPONDENTS,
v.
ALEX CHAPARRO, DEFENDANT, THE CITY OF NEW YORK, ET AL., DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS.

Hernandez v Chaparro

Decided on May 29, 2012

Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.

This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.

Friedman, J.P., Sweeny, Renwick, Freedman, Abdus-Salaam, JJ.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Geoffrey D. Wright, J.), entered March 4, 2011, which denied defendants-appellants' motion to dismiss the complaint as untimely served and granted plaintiff's cross motion for leave to serve a late verified complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The motion court providently exercised its discretion, pursuant to CPLR 3012, in denying the motion and granting the cross motion (see Lisojo v Phillip, 188 AD2d 369, 369 [1992]). In light of the complexity of the guardianship and estate proceedings preceding service of the complaint, there appears to be a reasonable excuse for the delay (id.). Further, considering plaintiff's handicap as an administrator and guardian (see Santana v Prospect Hosp., 84 AD2d 714, 714 [1981]), as well as the lack of discovery from defendants, plaintiff's affidavit of merit contained "evidentiary facts sufficient to establish a prima facie case" (Kel Mgt. Corp. v Rogers & Wells, 64 NY2d 904, 905 [1985]). Moreover, defendants' failure to show any prejudice strongly favors excuse of plaintiff's failure to timely serve the complaint (Lisojo, 188 AD2d at 369; Santana, 84 AD2d at 714-715).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.

ENTERED: MAY 29, 2012

CLERK

20120529

© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.