Summary
ruling that plaintiff's failure to object to defendant's late answer for six weeks waived claim that answer not timely served
Summary of this case from Bland v. StateOpinion
October 22, 1998
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Diane Lebedeff, J.).
Assuming arguendo that defendant's answer was four days late, plaintiff's retention of defendant's answer for some six weeks without objection, during which time plaintiff responded to the answer by apparently repleading his causes of action and served a bill of particulars and authorizations for medical and employment records, constituted a waiver of any claim that the answer was not timely served ( see, Wittlin v. Schapiro's Wine Co., 178 A.D.2d 160, 161).
Concur — Milonas, J. P., Williams, Andrias and Saxe, JJ.