| Shelkowitz v Rainess |
| 2008 NY Slip Op 09906 [57 AD3d 337] |
| December 18, 2008 |
| Appellate Division, First Department |
| Hava Shelkowitz, Appellant, v Errol Rainess,Respondent. |
—[*1] Ira B. Pollack & Associates, PLLC, Port Chester (Ira B. Pollack of counsel), forrespondent.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Leland G. DeGrasse, J.), entered July 18, 2007,which, insofar as appealed from as limited by the briefs in an action for personal injuriesallegedly sustained in a slip and fall on an accumulation of snow and ice in front of defendant'sbuilding, granted defendant's cross motion to dismiss the complaint, unanimously affirmed,without costs.
Dismissal of the complaint was proper where plaintiff did not effect service of the summonsand complaint upon defendant within 120 days after the filing of the action (CPLR 306-b). Nor isan extension of time for service warranted in the "interest of justice" (id.). The request foran extension of time was not made until opposition to defendant's cross motion to dismiss, whichwas approximately 20 months after the filing of the action (see Slate v Schiavone Constr. Co., 4 NY3d 816 [2005]; Pecker Iron Works, Inc. v NamascoCorp., 37 AD3d 367 [2007]). Furthermore, contrary to plaintiff's contention, CPLR 207is not applicable as there is no evidence that defendant was either absent from the state within themeaning of the statute, or that he was listed under a false name. Concur—Lippman, P.J.,Tom, Buckley, Moskowitz and Renwick, JJ.