Hoyos v Port Auth. of N.Y. & N.J.

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

Hoyos v Port Auth. of N.Y. & N.J. 2013 NY Slip Op 33615(U) December 19, 2013 Sup Ct, Queens County Docket Number: 703301/12 Judge: Bernice D. Siegal Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e., 2013 NY Slip Op 30001(U), are republished from various state and local government websites. These include the New York State Unified Court System's E-Courts Service, and the Bronx County Clerk's office. This opinion is uncorrected and not selected for official publication. [*FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 12/23/2013 1] INDEX NO. 703301/2012 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 11 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 12/23/2013 ,d~;~fnl '. " ~~~ ~~~ NEW YORK STATE SUPREME COURT - QU~ENS COUNTY Present: HONORABLE BERNICE D. SIEGAL lAS TERM, PART 19 Justice _-----.----------_. __ ------------_ _)( Roxana Hoyos and Robert Hoyos, Plaintiffs, Index No.: 703301/12 Motion Date: 10/21/13 Motion Cal. No.: 60 Motion Seq. No.: I .against- f\LED Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, Delta Air Lines, Inc., and LaGuardia Airport, DEC '2 '320\3 COUNTYCLE~ aUEENSCOU Defendants. ----_.------.-----_ ...._--_ ..._-----------------_ .._ ..--------_._-)( The following papers numbered I to 4 read on this motion for an order pursuant to CPLR g602, consolidating for all purpose the instant action ("Action #1 ':) with the proceeding known as "Hoyos v. Triangle Services, Inc., and Maintech Acquisition, LLC" and bearing Index No.: 703029/2013 ("Action # 2"), amending the caption to reflect the consolidation, and deeming the consolidated action to continue under)ndex Number 703301/2012 with venue in Queens County; (2) If the consolidation of Action #1 and #2 sought above is denied, then in the alternative consolidating Actions #1 and #2 to the extent that they should be jointly tried, amending the caption to reflect the consolidation, and deeming the consolidated action to have Index Number 70330 1/20 12 with venue in Queens County; and (3) scheduling a conference for the consolidated action so that a discovery schedule covering all the parties can be put in place. PAPERS NUMBERED Notice of Motion - Affidavits-Exhibits . I - 4 Upon the foregoing papers, it is hereby ordered that the mqtion is resolved as follows: Motion by attorney for plaintiffs Roxana Hoyos and Roger Hoyos for an order pursuant to CPLR g602(a) joining or consolidating, for all purposes, the within action with the proceeding . [* 2] known as Hoyos v Triangle Services, Inc, and Maintech Acquisitions, LLC bearing Index No. 703029/2013 ("Action No.2), as both actions involve common questions oflaw and fact, is granted, without opposition. The above entitled actions were brought to recover damages for personal injuries allegedly sustained on January 20,2012. Plaintiff commenced the within action on December 21,2012. A preliminary conference was held on May 2, 2012 under Action No. I. On July 30, 2013, Plaintiff filed Action NO.2 (703029/2013). "Consolidation is addressed to the sound discretion of the trial court and, absent a showing of substantial prejudice by the party opposing the same, is proper where there are common questions oflawandfact." (Best Price Jewelers. Com, Inc. v. Internet Data Storage, 51 AD.3d 839 [2nd Dept. 2008].) Absent a showing of prejudice to a substantial right by a party opposing the motion, consolidation should be granted where common questions oflaw or fact exist." (Gadelov v. Shure, 274 AD.2d 375 [2nd Dept. 2000].) "Consolidation is appropriate where it will avoid unnecessary duplication of trials, save unnecessary costs and expense, and prevent an injustice which would result from divergent decisions based on the same facts (citations omitted)." (Via/ax Corp. v. Citicorp Leasing. Inc., 54 AD.3d 846 [2nd Dept. 2008].) Inasmuch as this action and the second action both , arise from the same incident, consolidation of the actions is warranted, and the motion therefore is granted, without opposition. Accordingly, it hereby is ORDERED, that the aforementioned actions shall be tfiedjointly in this Court imder Index No. 703301/2012; and it is further ORDERED, that the title of the actions combined for trial shall be: [* 3] .,', ---------------------------------------------------------------------)( Roxana Hoyos and Robert Hoyos, Index No.: 703301/12 Plaintiffs, I -againstPort Authority of New York and New Jersey, Delta Air Lines, Inc., LaGuardia Airport, Triangle Services Inc., and Maintech Acquisition, LLC Defendants. ------------------------------------------------------------------)( and it is further ORDERED, that the parties are directed to contact the Preliminary Conference Part to address any outstanding discovery; and it is further ORDERED, that a copy of this order with notice of entry shall be served on all parties to the actions combined, the clerk of Queens County and, at the time of the filing of a Note ofIssue, on the Clerk of the Trial Term Office.

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.