- Bookmark
- Share
- CaseIQ
TUTORA v. SCHIRRIPA
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department.
Nov 3, 2003
Important Paras
Please sign up to view Important Paras.
DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.
It is well settled that to avoid dismissal for failure to serve a complaint after a demand therefor has been served pursuant to CPLR 3012(b), a plaintiff must demonstrate both a reasonable excuse for the delay in serving the complaint and a meritorious cause of action ( see Dunefsky v. Petco Animal Supplies, 303 A.D.2d 620; Balgley v. Cammarata, 299 A.D.2d 432; Miraglia v. County of Nassau, 295 A.D.2d 411). The plaintiff failed to show the existence of a meritorious cause of action. Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly dismissed the action.
SANTUCCI, J.P., GOLDSTEIN, SCHMIDT and COZIER, JJ., concur.
x
Alert
Please log in or sign up for a free trial to access this feature.