Practice point: The Appellate Division affirmed the denial of that branch of the plaintiff's motion which was, in effect, to extend
the time in which to conduct his deposition, since the plaintiff's own
failure to comply with discovery demands hampered the defendant's ability to conduct the deposition. In addition, the
plaintiff failed to show good cause for the past delay and that the defendant would not be prejudiced by the delay.
Student note: In exercising its discretion to grant an extension of time pursuant to
CPLR 2004, a court may consider such factors as the length of the delay,
the reason or excuse for the delay, and any prejudice to the motion's opponent.
Case: Blay v. Frost, NY Slip Op 01771 (2d Dept. 2015)
Here is the decision.
Tomorrow's issue: Improper service and dismissal for lack of jurisdiction.
