Acosta v Riverdale Dev., LLC

Acosta v Riverdale Dev., LLC 2010 NY Slip Op 03157 [72 AD3d 525] April 20, 2010 Appellate Division, First Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. As corrected through Wednesday, June 9, 2010

Belkis Acosta, Respondent,
v
Riverdale Development, LLC, et al., Appellants, et al., Defendants.

—[*1] Shay & Maguire LLP, East Meadow (Jaret SanPietro of counsel), for Riverdale Development, LLC, Kapson Riverdale Corp., Kapson Senior Quarters Corp., Henry Johnson Associates, Inc., Henry Hudson Parkway Building, Inc. and ARV Assisted Living, Inc., appellants.

Ahmuty, Demers & McManus, New York (Patrick J. Kenny of counsel), for Otis Elevator Company, appellant.

Louis Atilano, Bronx, for respondent.

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Alison Y. Tuitt, J.), entered May 15, 2009, which granted plaintiff's motion to vacate a default judgment and restore this matter to the trial calendar, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

A compliance conference was held during the pendency of a stay of the action. Defendants appeared, but plaintiff, then pro se, did not. The conference was adjourned, and plaintiff was never notified of the adjournment date. Initially, we note that the action was improperly dismissed under Uniform Rules for Trial Courts (22 NYCRR) § 202.27. Although plaintiff did not appear for the adjourned conference, she was wholly ignorant of the conference date through no fault of her own. Thus, section 202.27 (b) is inapplicable.

We need not consider the merits of plaintiff's claim because the order entering the default under section 202.27 was improperly entered. [*2]Finally, vacatur here was consistent with the strong public policy favoring resolution of cases on their merits (Telep v Republic El. Corp., 267 AD2d 57, 58-59 [1999]). Concur—Tom, J.P., Saxe, Friedman, Nardelli and Catterson, JJ.