Practice point: The Appellate Division affirmed the denial of the 306-b cross-motion to dismiss and the granting of the 205(b) motion for leave to extend time to serve process. After the dismissal of a previous action without prejudice, the plaintiff commenced the instant action within the applicable limitations period. The six-month period in CPLR 205(a) is not a limitations period but a tolling provision, which has no application where, as here, the statute of limitations has not expired at the time the second action was commenced.
Student note: The Appellate Division determined that the Supreme Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in finding, in effect, that the time for service should be extended in the interest of justice.
Case: Bonilla v. Tutor Perini Corp., NY Slip 09237 (2d Dept. 2015)
Here is the decision.
Tomorrow's issue: Disclosure and social media.
