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.
Pamela L. ZIMMER and Gerald Zimmer, Plaintiffs-Respondents, v. LAKE SHORE HOSPITAL, Sukoo Lee, M.D., and Michael M. Candaras, M.D., Defendants-Appellants.
Supreme Court erred in denying defendants' motions to dismiss the complaint. Plaintiffs commenced this medical malpractice action by filing a summons and complaint in the County Clerk's office on October 31, 1997. They failed to file proof of service, however, until March 4, 1998. Under former CPLR 306-b (a), failure to file proof of service within 120 days was a “fatal jurisdictional defect” resulting in automatic dismissal (Matter of Barsalow v. City of Troy, 208 A.D.2d 1144, 1145, 617 N.Y.S.2d 594). Because the Statute of Limitations expired on November 4, 1997 and plaintiffs did not avail themselves of the extension provisions of former CPLR 306-b (b), the action is time-barred (see, Matter of Barsalow v. City of Troy, supra).
Plaintiffs' reliance on Matter of Fry v. Village of Tarrytown, 89 N.Y.2d 714, 658 N.Y.S.2d 205, 680 N.E.2d 578, is misplaced. That case involved a dismissal based on a defect in the initial papers filed with the clerk of the court. The Court of Appeals concluded that the threshold filing defect did not authorize a sua sponte dismissal because the respondents appeared in the proceeding and litigated the merits without raising that objection (see, Matter of Fry v. Village of Tarrytown, supra, at 716, 658 N.Y.S.2d 205, 680 N.E.2d 578). Here, the dismissal was for failure to file proof of service (see, Connor v. Deas, 255 A.D.2d 287, 288, 679 N.Y.S.2d 321; 2 Weinstein-Korn-Miller, N.Y. Civ. Prac. ¶ 306-b.02).
Order unanimously reversed on the law with costs, motions granted and complaint dismissed.
MEMORANDUM:
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: May 10, 2000
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth 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)