Legal Opinion
Lucious v. Rutland Nursing Home
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided December 1, 2003PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Knipel, J.), dated May 3, 2002, which granted the plaintiffs motion to “restore” the action to active status.
Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
Contrary to the defendants’ contention, CPLR 3404 does not apply to this pre-note of issue case (see Lopez v Imperial Delivery Serv., 282 AD2d 190 [2001]). Furthermore, there was no 90-day notice pursuant to CPLR 3216, nor was there an order dismissing the complaint pursuant to 22 NYCRR 202.27. Accordingly, the…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Lopez v. Imperial Delivery Service, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2001
- Johnson v. Brooklyn Hospital CenterAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2002
- Farley v. Danaher Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2002
- Torres v. Nu-Way Machinery Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2002
3Cited by5 opinions
- Andre v. Bonetto Realty Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2006
- Mitskevitch v. City of New YorkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2010
- 123X Corp. v. McKenzieAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2004
- Burdick v. MarcusAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2005
- Casavecchia v. MizrahiAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2009