From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Cuprill v. Citywide Towing & Auto Repair Servs.

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Apr 6, 2017
149 A.D.3d 442 (N.Y. App. Div. 2017)

Opinion

04-06-2017

Manuel A. CUPRILL, Plaintiff–Appellant, v. CITYWIDE TOWING AND AUTO REPAIR SERVICES, et al., Defendants–Respondents.

Ogen & Sedaghati, P.C., New York (Eitan Alexander Ogen of counsel), for appellant. Marks, O'Neill, O'Brien, Doherty & Kelly, P.C., Elmsford (James M. Skelly of counsel), for respondents.


Ogen & Sedaghati, P.C., New York (Eitan Alexander Ogen of counsel), for appellant.

Marks, O'Neill, O'Brien, Doherty & Kelly, P.C., Elmsford (James M. Skelly of counsel), for respondents.

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Laura G. Douglas, J.), entered December 22, 2016, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the briefs, granted defendants' motion to compel post-note of issue discovery, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The motion court providently exercised its discretion in granting defendants' motion. Contrary to plaintiff's argument, defendants did not seek, and the motion court did not order, vacatur of the note of issue. Trial courts are authorized, as a matter of discretion, to permit post-note of issue discovery without vacating the note of issue, so long as neither party will be prejudiced (see Pickering v. Union 15 Rest. Corp., 107 A.D.3d 450, 966 N.Y.S.2d 431 [1st Dept.2013] ), and we perceive no prejudice here (see e.g. Dominguez v. Manhattan & Bronx Surface Tr. Operating Auth., 168 A.D.2d 376, 376–377, 562 N.Y.S.2d 694 [1st Dept.1990] ).

Counsel's affirmations submitted with the initial motion and on reply, when viewed together, provided sufficient detail to comply with 22 NYCRR 202.7(c) (Loeb v. Assara N.Y. I L.P., 118 A.D.3d 457, 457–458, 987 N.Y.S.2d 365 [1st Dept.2014] ).

We have considered plaintiff's remaining arguments and find them unavailing.

RENWICK, J.P., MAZZARELLI, MANZANET–DANIELS, FEINMAN, WEBBER, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Cuprill v. Citywide Towing & Auto Repair Servs.

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Apr 6, 2017
149 A.D.3d 442 (N.Y. App. Div. 2017)
Case details for

Cuprill v. Citywide Towing & Auto Repair Servs.

Case Details

Full title:Manuel A. CUPRILL, Plaintiff–Appellant, v. CITYWIDE TOWING AND AUTO REPAIR…

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.

Date published: Apr 6, 2017

Citations

149 A.D.3d 442 (N.Y. App. Div. 2017)
49 N.Y.S.3d 624

Citing Cases

Vazquez v. 3M Co.

In any event, the court providently exercised its discretion in declining to vacate the note of issue, as the…

Utilisave, LLC v. Fox Horan & Camerini, LLP

Indeed, the affirmation must detail the parties' diligent efforts to resolve the dispute (see Mironer v City…