Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Edna Potts PETERS, etc., Plaintiff-Respondent, v. The CITY OF NEW YORK HEALTH AND HOSPITALS CORPORATION, et al., Defendants, Victor Mariani, M.D., Defendant-Appellant. [And a Third-Party Action].
Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Norma Ruiz, J.), entered on or about May 11, 2006, which denied the motion of defendant Victor Mariani, M.D. to dismiss the complaint for failure to timely substitute a representative for the deceased plaintiff, and granted plaintiff's motion to substitute a representative of the estate of the deceased plaintiff and to amend the complaint to the extent of reflecting such substitution, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
By submitting its expert's affidavit of merit and a reasonable explanation for the delay in seeking substitution, decedent's estate showed adequate cause why this medical malpractice action should not have been dismissed for failure to timely move for substitution (see CPLR 1015[a]; 1021). Moreover, the strong public policy of this State is to dispose of matters on the merits (Noriega v. Presbyterian Hosp. in City of N.Y., 305 A.D.2d 220, 221, 761 N.Y.S.2d 18 [2003] ). Accordingly, a motion to substitute a party after a lengthy delay should be granted absent a showing of prejudice by the defendant (Schwartz v. Montefiore Hosp. & Med. Ctr., 305 A.D.2d 174, 176, 761 N.Y.S.2d 5 [2003] ). Here, defendant Mariani failed to demonstrate prejudice because the action will likely rely on medical records and other documentary evidence and not the testimony of eyewitnesses (see Wynter v. Our Lady of Mercy Med. Ctr., 3 A.D.3d 376, 378, 771 N.Y.S.2d 94 [2004] ).
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Decided: February 26, 2008
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)