Soto v 39-43 Sch. St., Inc.
Annotate this CaseDecided on August 14, 2012
Supreme Court, Bronx County
John Soto, Plaintiff,
against
39-43 School Street, Inc., Romero Auto Repair and Vanegas Auto Body Shop, Inc., , Defendants.
21277/2011E
Attorney for Plaintiff: Robert J. Menna, Esq., Law Offices of Alan M. Greenberg, P.C.
Alexander W. Hunter Jr., J.
The motion by order to show cause by Robert J. Menna, Esq., for an order permitting the Law Offices of Alan M. Greenberg, P.C., to withdraw as attorneys for plaintiff, is denied.
The cause of action is for personal injuries sustained by plaintiff on April 15, 2011 when he was riding his motorcycle and made a right turn onto Morgan Street in Yonkers, New York, and was caused to fall off his motorcycle as a result of a slick, slippery and/or oily condition that originated from the driveway of 36 Morgan Street.
Movant asserts that the driveway and sidewalk area where the accident occurred belonged to the garage maintained by defendant Romero Auto Repair, shared with defendant Vanegas Auto Body Shop, Inc. and owned by defendant 39-43 School Street, Inc. Movant further asserts that the instant action was commenced on or about May 31, 2011 and defendants 39-43 School Street, Inc. and Vanegas Auto Body Shop, Inc., were served via the Secretary of State on August 1, 2011. However, upon attempt of service on defendant Romero Auto Repair, it was discovered that said repair shop was out of business and said defendant has not established another business.
Movant contends that Law Offices of Alan M. Greenberg, P.C., is unable to continue representing plaintiff where defendant Romero Auto Repair is unable to be served and, after thorough investigation, it was determined that none of the defendants maintained a general liability policy at the time of the accident. Movant further asserts that no defendant has submitted an answer to plaintiff's complaint. As such, movants seek to withdraw as counsel for plaintiff.
This court did not receive any papers in opposition to the instant motion. However, the motion is denied. Movant has not provided this court with good and sufficient cause to withdraw as counsel of record for plaintiff. Mason v. MTA New York City Transit, 38 AD3d 258 (1st [*2]Dept. 2007); In re Dunn, 205 NY 398 (1912). Plaintiff's counsel merely seeks to withdraw as counsel due to the fact that defendants allegedly maintained no insurance. Furthermore, even though movant asserts that service cannot be effectuated upon defendant Romero Auto Repair, service was effectuated upon defendants Vanegas Auto Body Shop, Inc. and defendant 39-43 School Street, Inc., more than one year ago. Movant does not indicate whether or not any steps were taken within the past year to seek a default judgment against said defendants. Movant also claims that defendant Romero Auto Repair was out of business when service was attempted upon said defendant but movant does not indicate when service was attempted.
Accordingly, the motion by Law Offices of Alan M. Greenberg, P.C., to withdraw as counsel for plaintiff is denied.
Movant is directed to serve a copy of this order with notice of entry upon all parties and file proof thereof with the clerk's office.
This constitutes the decision and order of this court.
Date:August 14, 2012
J.S.C.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
