Bhuiyan v. New York City Health & Hospitals Corp.
Cases that cite this one
22 later published cases cite this decision.
- Giotis v. Besser (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2022)
- Codrington v. Churcher (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2022)
- Ki Tae Kim v. Bishop (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2017)
- U.S. Bank N.A. v. Burdeinaya (New York Supreme Court, Kings County 2025)
- V. v. Leo (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2023)
- U.S. Bank, N.A. v. Imtiaz (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2021)
- Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Harrigan (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2020)
- Singh v. Sukhu (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2020)
- Hamilton v. New York Hosp. Queens (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2020)
- Prakope v. Public Stor. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2020)
- Tlais v. Cinozgumes (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2020)
- Vizelter v. Strogov (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2019)
- Kondrotas-Williams v. Westbridge Enters., Inc. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2019)
- NYCTL 2009-A Trust v. Advance Realty of NYS, LLC (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2019)
- U.S. Bank, N.A. v. Essaghof (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2019)
- Soto v. Chelsea W26, LLC (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2018)
- Paul v. Weatherwax (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2017)
- Law Office of Civardi & Obiol, P.C. v. Weisberg & Weisberg (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2016)
- Lyubomirsky v. Lubov Arulin, PLLC (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2015)
- Maniscalco v. Mount Sinai Medical Center (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2015)
- J.C. Ryan EBCO/H&G, LLC v. Cyber-Struct, Inc. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2015)
- J & J Alarcon Realty Corp. v. Plantains Restaurant, Inc. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2014)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion
In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for medical malpractice, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Knipel, J.), dated April 19, 2013, which denied their motion, in effect, to vacate an order of the same court dated July 20, 2012, granting the defendant’s unopposed motion pursuant CPLR 3126 to dismiss the complaint.
Ordered that the order dated April 19, 2013 is affirmed, with costs.
A party seeking to vacate an order entered upon his or her failure to oppose a motion is required to demonstrate, through the submission of supporting facts in evidentiary form, both a reasonable excuse for the default and the existence of a potentially meritorious opposition to the motion (see Garcia v Shaw, 118 AD3d 943 [2014]; Karamuco v Cohen, 90 AD3d 998 [2011]; Thapt v Lutheran Med. Ctr., 89 AD3d 837 [2011]; Donovan v Chiapetta, 72 AD3d 635, 636 [2010]). “The determination of what constitutes a reasonable excuse lies within the Supreme Court’s discretion, and the Supreme Court has the discretion to accept law office failure as a reasonable excuse where that claim is supported by a detailed and credible explanation of the default or defaults at issue” (Swensen v MV Transp., Inc., 89 AD3d 924, 925 [2011] [internal quotation marks and citations omitted]).
Here, the Supreme Court providently determined that the plaintiffs failed to present a reasonable excuse for their failure to submit opposition papers. Contrary to the plaintiffs’ conten *1285 tions, the defendant appropriately served its motion upon the pro se plaintiffs pursuant to CPLR 2103 (c) when the plaintiffs had not yet retained counsel.
Accordingly, we need not address the issue of whether the plaintiffs demonstrated a potentially meritorious opposition to the motion (see Garcia v Shaw, 118 AD3d at 943; Silva v Honeydew Cab Corp., 116 AD3d 691, 692 [2014]).
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.