Case Name: Dolores Connolly et al., Appellants, v. 129 East 69th Street Corporation et al., Respondents
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 2015-04-28
Citations: 127 A.D.3d 617
Docket Number: 
Parties: Dolores Connolly et al., Appellants, v 129 East 69th Street Corporation et al., Respondents.
Judges: Concur — Gonzalez, P.J., Mazzarelli, Renwick and Gische, JJ.
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 127
Pages: 617–618

Head Matter:
Dolores Connolly et al., Appellants, v 129 East 69th Street Corporation et al., Respondents.
[7 NYS3d 889]—

Opinion:
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Geoffrey D. Wright, J.), entered March 3, 2014, which granted the motions of defendants 129 East 69th Street Corporation, Plaza Florist Too, Inc., doing business as Plaza Flowers, and Lawrence Friedland and Melvin Friedland dismissing the complaint, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, and the motions denied.
Supreme Court's individual part rules provided that motions for summary judgment were to be "filed" within 60 days of the filing of the note of issue. Since plaintiffs filed the note of issue on July 10, 2013, the motions for summary judgment were due by September 9, 2013. While 129 East 69th Street Corporation (129 East) made (served) a motion for summary judgment on September 4, 2013, it did not file the motion until September 10, 2013, one day after the 60-day time period expired. Therefore, the motion was untimely (see Corchado v City of New York, 64 AD3d 429 [1st Dept 2009]). The other defendants' motions, having been filed after 129 East's motion, were also untimely.
We have considered the other arguments and find them unavailing.
Concur — Gonzalez, P.J., Mazzarelli, Renwick and Gische, JJ.