Uniform Rules for Trial Courts § 202.21[e].

Pursuant to the rule, "[w]ithin 20 days after service of a note of issue and certificate of readiness, any party to the action or special proceeding may move to vacate the note of issue, upon affidavit showing in what respects the case is not ready for trial, and the court may vacate the note of issue if it appears that a material fact in the certificate of readiness is incorrect." A statement in a certificate of readiness to the effect that all pretrial discovery has been completed is a material fact, and where that statement is incorrect, the note of issue should be vacated. On a timely motion to vacate, the movant
 is required only to demonstrate why the case is not ready for trial, and is not required to establish that additional discovery is necessary. However, where the Supreme Court has directed the completion of discovery by a certain date or where the party seeking vacatur has failed to timely comply with court orders and discovery demands, denial of a motion to vacate is proper.

Cioffi v. S.M. Foods, Inc., NY Slip Op 09250 (2d Dep't December 24, 2019)

Here is the decision.

CPLR 3212(a).

 Unless the court has set a different date, a motion for summary judgment must be made "no later than one hundred twenty days after the filing of the note of issue, except with leave of court on good cause shown." In the absence of a showing of good cause, the court has no discretion to entertain even a meritorious, nonprejudicial motion for summary judgment.

Bricenio v. Perez, NY Slip Op 09249 (2d Dep't December 24, 2019)

Here is the decision.

A process server's affidavit.

The affidavit constitutes prima facie evidence of proper service, and gives rise to a presumption of proper service.  A conclusory denial of service is insufficient to rebut the presumption.  In order to warrant a hearing, the denial must be substantiated by specific, detailed facts that contradict the affidavit.

Bethpage Fed. Credit Union v. Grant, NY Slip Op 09246 (2d Dep't December 24, 2019)

Here is the decision.

Summary judgment in a medical malpractice action.

A plaintiff is only required to raise a triable issue of fact as to causation where the defendant makes a prima facie showing that the alleged departure from the standard of care was not a proximate cause of the plaintiff's injuries.

Barry v. Lee, NY Slip Op 09397 (1st Dep't December 26, 2019)

Here is the decision.

A corporate officer's liability.

Although a plaintiff fails to satisfy the requirements for piercing the corporate veil, liability may be imposed on a corporate officer who participates in the commission of a tort, even if the officer's participation is for the corporation's benefit.

Belle Light. LLC v. Artisan Constr. Partners LLC, NY Slip Op 09359 (1st Dep't December 26, 2019)

Here is the decision.

22 NYCRR 202.7(a)(2) .

On a discovery motion, the movant must submit an affirmation of good faith indicating that, prior to engaging in motion practice, efforts had been made to resolve issues.

Belle-Fleur v. Desriviere, NY Slip Op 09244 (2d Dep't December 24, 2019)

Here is the decision.

CPLR 3215(f).

An applicant for a default judgment must submit proof of service of the summons and complaint, proof of the facts constituting the claim, and proof of the defaulting defendant's failure to answer or appear. Where the complaint is not verified, the requisite proof must be set forth in an affidavit made by the party.

Deutsche Bank Natl. Trust Co. v. Silverman, NY Slip Op 08990 (2d Dep't December 18, 2019)

Here is the decision.

A deceased party.

The part of the order that severed the action against the party, who at that point was deceased, is vacated as void, as no legal representative has been appointed. An earlier order, issued while the party was alive, is not void. However, an appeal from that order will be dismissed, without prejudice, if an estate representative has not been appointed.

Bonnaig v. Walton, NY Slip Op 09103 (1st Dep't December 19, 2019)

Here is the decision.