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.
Isiah SPIVEY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. John J. BOUTEUREIRA, Defendant-Respondent.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Joan Madden, J.), entered April 20, 1998, which, in an action for personal injuries arising out of an automobile accident, denied plaintiff's motion to restore the action to the trial calendar and granted defendant's cross motion to dismiss the action as abandoned pursuant to CPLR 3404, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
Plaintiff's counsel, who claims that he was never told by the court, and never received notice from his calendar service, that the case had been marked off the trial calendar at a pretrial conference at which plaintiff was directed to submit to a further medical examination, has failed to demonstrate a reasonable excuse in passively waiting for the announcement of a trial date for three and a half years without making any kind of inquiry as to the case's status (see, Rodriguez v. Hercules Chem. Co., 228 A.D.2d 319, 644 N.Y.S.2d 229). Defendant's choice not to conduct a further medical examination of plaintiff within the court-ordered time frame, which was very early on in this three and a half-year period, does not excuse plaintiff's subsequent inordinate delay. There being no indication of any litigation activity in the case since the day after the pretrial conference, when plaintiff forwarded certain medical information to defendant in compliance with directives made at the conference, to plaintiff's making of the instant motion three and a half years later, the action was properly dismissed pursuant to CPLR 3404 (see, 179 MacDougal Equities v. North Realty Co., 232 A.D.2d 280, 648 N.Y.S.2d 551).
MEMORANDUM DECISION.
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: March 25, 1999
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)