- Bookmark
- Share
- CaseIQ
GOLDSTEIN v. LOPRESTI
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department.
Dec 16, 2002
Important Paras
Please sign up to view Important Paras.
DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with one bill of costs.
The plaintiff argues that this medical malpractice action, which is otherwise time-barred, is timely pursuant to CPLR 205(a) because it was commenced within six months after the dismissal of a prior timely action based on the same series of occurrences. However, because the prior action was dismissed for neglect to prosecute, CPLR 205(a) is not applicable (see Benedetto v. Hodes, 112 A.D.2d 393; Wright v. Farlin, 42 A.D.2d 141; Schwartz v. Luks, 46 A.D.2d 634; CPLR 3012[b]). Thus, this action was properly dismissed.
RITTER, J.P., O'BRIEN, GOLDSTEIN and TOWNES, JJ., concur.
x
Alert
Please log in or sign up for a free trial to access this feature.