Chew v Chang

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

Chew v Chang 2023 NY Slip Op 31602(U) May 5, 2023 Supreme Court, Kings County Docket Number: Index No. 527849/2022 Judge: Leon Ruchelsman Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e., 2013 NY Slip Op 30001(U), are republished from various New York State and local government sources, including the New York State Unified Court System's eCourts Service. This opinion is uncorrected and not selected for official publication. INDEX NO. 527849/2022 FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 05/12/2023 09:49 AM NYSCEF DOC. NO. 47 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/12/2023 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW .YORK COUNTY OF K:It-IGS : C.IVIL TERM:. COMJ:-11, PART 8 - - - - . ---· -· ·-- · · - - - - - - - - ·._. ___ .___ .__ ··----. STEPHEN SHAN, STDDHANTA RAYLENE CHEW., DANGE and ·--· ·X 'EVAN KATZ, Deci~ion ihd order Plaintiffs., Index N6. 527849/2022 - agaitist - JESSICA CHANG, ZOZJ .May 5 , ..... Defendant., --·----. ,-.--------. ·------. ----. --·--. ·. - .----x. Motion Seq. #3 PRESENT.: HON. LEON RUCHELSMAN seeking. to The plaintiffs mqve .pursuant to CPLR §.3217 (.b:) dis continue· · the oppos·ed p.1,.1rsuant th.e to wit hou:t act ion motiop., and. cross"""'mov.ed §3212 CPLR prejudice . dismissing s.ee,}d,ng The summary lawsuit. the .submitted by the pa·rties and ,arguments held. p.efend~nt has j.u.dgem:erit Papers were 1\.fter reviewing all the arguments this court now. 'makes the following determinatio; n .. The facts were adequately presented in a. pr.ior order dated Jf:J.r1ua.ry·· 4, 2:0.23. contract cause In that orde+ the· court dismissed the breach bf of action. The plaintiffs discontinue· the action without prejudice. have now moved to As rioted, that motiofr is opposed and .the de·fenda.nt se~ks summaxy judg-em:.ent dismis·sj.hg the entire action. Conclusions of Law.: It is well settled that a plaintiff may discontinue an action against certain defendants. wher.e the substantia.L .rights of other parties wi 11 no.t be pre j udiGed (.Tue ker v. Tue ker, 55 NY 2.d 3 7.8., 4 4 9 NYS2d 683 [1982], RLiderman v. Brunn, 65 AD2d 771, 409 NYS2d 7 8 9 [2d Dept., 1.9·79]) . [* 1] ... That discretion includes the· ·determinatio n whether 1 of 4 ---------- ---------- -------············ ············ -··------- INDEX NO. 527849/2022 FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 05/12/2023 09:49 AM NYSCEF DOC. NO. 47 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/12/2023 s.uch di$con-t;:_i_nuan ce is _g;ianted.. 'with.out prejudice' 8 0, AD2d 24 4, Val lada.res, decision wh.ether to {Va:11.adares v. 1981] ) . [2d Dept. , 438 NYS2d 81 o The grant such discontinuanc e rests with the sound discretion ·.of the :court {Harper v. -Jamaica Hospital, 239 ,AD2d 38·8, 658 NYS2d 8.8.3 [2d Dept., Generally, 199.7] ) • :should·. -be granted unless. valid re·a:s-ons, 752 NYS2ct 896 ·such. as prej-udicre· to the (Mathias v. Daily News L .. P., 301 AO2d ·defendant, .\,itarrant denial 503, such discontinuanc e Prejudice 2003]). Dept., [2d discorttinuanc .e would p,rej udi_ce a means the s_ubst-antial rig:tJ,t of ·_a pa:rty,, circumvent an order 9f the. court, avoid the consequences c:if a potent.tally adverse determination or produce· some other :improper result· (Marinelli. v. Wimmer, -13·9 AD3:d 914 ,.. 30 NYS3d .571 [.2_d. Dept., 2016]). Thus, in Catherine Commons LLC v. Town of Orangetown, 157 ·AD3d 785, request 662" 69 NYS-3d fo.r [2d Dept:., 20-18.] the. cour-t denied the voluntary -.discc;mtinu.an..c::e -si:q.pe would prejudice a party's s_uch a,bility to challenge discontinuan ce an assessment. Again in Bae. z. v. Parkway Mobile Homes Inc., 125 AD3d -905,. S NYS--3-ct 154 f2o Dep::t., 2015] :the co.t:t:i::'t hel_d discontinuan ce where it wa.$ ori.ly· pursµed to was improper avoid the consequences of failing- to respond to ._a 90 notice: and a_p. adve-r-se q.eterminatio if of a -summary judgemei1t motion filed. Ih. this case the bas·is for ·the discontinua.ri. ce i.s the -desire·. of the plainti_f.f' s ''t,o r~ta. iri counsel .else:wherell (see, Memorc3.nd1-1m in Support, pa.ge 2 [NYSCEF Doc. Ne. 35] )". 2 [* 2] 2 of 4 The plc3.intiff elaborates INDEX NO. 527849/2022 FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 05/12/2023 09:49 AM NYSCEF DOC. NO. 47 in c1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/12/2023 .teply inetnorand:um tha:t ·"Plaintiffs have chosen to se-ek new counsel and. sue Defendant in California with that new .counse.l" (see, ·Affirmation in Opposition to- Defendant's Cros.s-Motion, . page 1 .[NYSC-EF Doc-. N9. 44] ) ~ In Urb'onowicz v. Yaririsky, 290 AD2d 922, 737 NYS2d 398 [3Fd Dept., 2002] the. plaintiffs. ·-there sought to_. ·"commence a second a.:ction in Saratoga County, .a prope::r venue where they believed a higher _verdict could be obtained" {id). The court mainta,ined there .was nothing .improper ab.out such a·. reque-_s"'!: as Jong as it did not result _in pr.ejudic:e to the de.fendants. Moreover, concerning the .c1llegation s--i:ich a request is ·nothing more than .impermissibl e forum shopp'ing the court explain1:d discontinuan ce merely makes it possible for to disconti,nuan. ce shopping" (id) . defeno.a:nts, of this we action Likew1se, decline to constitutes ·in Carter v. ,granting action the .b-roug_ht else·_where·. Absent compelling circums·tance s _prejudice in .cqµrt "a -:\:hat to. be ox particula-r th 9 t m:ere impermissibl e forum find Howland Hook Housih.tj Companv Inc., 19 A03d i46, 797 NYS2d 11 [2d Dept., 2005] the court allowed an action venued iri N.ew Yo:rk County to be discontinued _and brought in Kings .County upon _p.iscov.~rin_g. the de:fendant tnafntaine.d an office in kings county and that venue was proper there. How.ever, a diffe.rent. rµle applie.s where. the second- action is orought simply to avoid the consequences of adverse rulings taking place in the pending ·action. [* 3] 'i'hus, in Du.Bray v·.· ·warner Brothers 3 of 4 INDEX NO. 527849/2022 FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 05/12/2023 09:49 AM NYSCEF DOC. NO. 47 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/12/2023 Records, 236 AD2d 312, held improper to was it 653 NYS2d 592 discontinu e [ pt Dept., an action 1997] the court various to due rulings made with the hope to persuade another "court to reach Indeed, it has been held precisely the opposite cortclusion n (id). to proper discontinu e an where prejudice wi tb. action a based upon expected discontinu ance sought without prejudice is adverse rulings .foreclosi ng the possibili ty of commencing another action (~, Networks Inc., NBN 240 Broadcast ing AD2d 319, Inc. , v. Sheridan 659 NYS2d 262 Broadcast ing [ 1. st ·D ep t... , 1997]). Thus, pursuant to CPLR §3217 (b) the court may set the "terms and conditions ;' of the discontinu ance, (id) . ''as the court dE!ems proper" In this case the plaintiff has all but admitted they are seeking to discontin ue this action to pursue the same or similar claims in a different jurisdicti on. That is an improper basis upon which to seek a discontinu ance without prejudice ; motion seeking to discontinu e the action is granted. discontinu ed rendered with prejudice . The defen.dant ' s moot. So ordered. ENTER: DATED: May 5, 2.023 Brooklyn N.Y. :S-> Hon. Leon Ruchels~a n JSC 4 [* 4] 4 of 4 Therefore ; the The action is motion is now

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.