The court properly exercised its discretion in denying petitioner's cross motion. Although the return date on respondents' motion to dismiss did not comply with CPLR 2214 (b), respondents reasonably explained the error and promptly reserved the motion with a proper return date, and petitioner was not prejudiced by the brief delay.
We also affirm the court's dismissal of the article 78 proceeding. While the court erred in stating that dismissal was mandated because...
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
- Updated daily.
- Uncompromising quality.
- Complete, Accurate, Current.