ESTEY DORSA v. John Doe I-X, etc., et al., Defendants. (2006)

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

Josephine ESTEY-DORSA, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Teodoro CHAVEZ, Defendant-Appellant, John Doe I-X, etc., et al., Defendants.

Decided: March 14, 2006

BUCKLEY, P.J., ANDRIAS, WILLIAMS, GONZALEZ, MALONE, JJ.

Law Offices of Nancy L. Isserlis, Bethpage (Lawrence R. Miles of counsel), for appellant. Calcagno & Associates, Cranford, NJ (Anthony T. Ling of counsel), for respondent.

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Stanley Green, J.), entered February 23, 2005, which denied defendant Chavez's motion to dismiss the complaint and deemed the complaint served in January 2005 as timely, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The court providently exercised its discretion, in the interest of justice, in granting plaintiff a second extension of time to serve the summons and complaint (see CPLR 306-b). Relevant factors properly considered by the court were, inter alia, the expiration of the statute of limitations, defendant's failure to report his correct address at the time of the accident, defendant's failure to demonstrate prejudice, and timely notice of the claim to defendant's insurance company (see generally Leader v. Maroney, Ponzini & Spencer, 97 N.Y.2d 95, 736 N.Y.S.2d 291, 761 N.E.2d 1018 [2001] ).

We have considered defendant's other arguments and find them unavailing.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

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.

Explore the Network