Singh v Trahan
2017 NY Slip Op 06395 [153 AD3d 961]
August 30, 2017
Appellate Division, Second Department
As corrected through Wednesday, September 27, 2017


[*1]
 George P. Singh et al., Appellants,
v
Michael Trahan etal., Respondents.

Hersh Jakubowitz, Flushing, NY, for appellants.

Russo & Tambasco, Melville, NY (Yamile Al-Sullami of counsel), forrespondents.

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiffs appeal from an order ofthe Supreme Court, Nassau County (Mahon, J.), entered January 26, 2016, which denied theirrenewed motion pursuant to CPLR 306-b to extend the time to serve the summons and complaintupon the defendants.

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the facts and in the exercise of discretion, with costs,and the plaintiffs' renewed motion pursuant to CPLR 306-b to extend the time to serve thesummons and complaint upon the defendants is granted.

The denial of the plaintiffs' renewed motion pursuant to CPLR 306-b to extend the time toserve the defendants with the summons and complaint was an improvident exercise of discretion(see Leader v Maroney, Ponzini & Spencer, 97 NY2d 95, 105-106 [2001]). Whilethe action was timely commenced, the statute of limitations had expired when the plaintiffs firstmoved for relief, the timely service of process was subsequently found to have been defective,and the defendants had actual notice of the action within 120 days of commencement of theaction (see Selmani v City of NewYork, 100 AD3d 861, 862 [2012]; Samet v Binson, 67 AD3d 988, 989 [2009]; Rosenzweig v 600 N. St., LLC, 35AD3d 705, 705-706 [2006]; Chiarov D'Angelo, 7 AD3d 746 [2004]). Furthermore, the plaintiffs demonstrated a potentiallymeritorious cause of action, and there was no prejudice to the defendants attributable to the delayin service (see Castillo v JFK Medport,Inc., 116 AD3d 899, 900 [2014]; Selmani v City of New York, 100 AD3d at862; Bumpus v New York City Tr.Auth., 66 AD3d 26, 37 [2009]; de Vries v Metropolitan Tr. Auth., 11 AD3d 312, 313 [2004]).Balkin, J.P., Chambers, Barros and Brathwaite Nelson, JJ., concur.


NYPTI Decisions © 2026 is a project of New York Prosecutors Training Institute (NYPTI) made possible by leveraging the work we've done providing online research and tools to prosecutors.

NYPTI would like to thank New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services, New York State Senate's Open Legislation Project, New York State Unified Court System, New York State Law Reporting Bureau and Free Law Project for their invaluable assistance making this project possible.

Install the free RECAP extensions to help contribute to this archive. See https://free.law/recap/ for more information.