Maunz v. Laube

Order unanimously affirmed, without costs. Memorandum: We find no sufficient justification or explanation for the delay in serving the complaint herein, and under usual circumstances it would have been an abuse of discretion to deny the motion to dismiss the complaint pursuant to CPLR 3012. Here, however, the complaint, which was served on January 8, 1976, was retained by defendant without objection until February 5, 1976, and the motion to dismiss was not made until February 11, 1976. The objection to the late service of the complaint, under these circumstances, must be deemed to have been…