Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 14 JULY 2022

Late Answer In New York Results In Snowballed Consequences

New York's Appellate Division, Second Department reversed a trial court decision that granted a defendant's motion to compel acceptance of a late answer.

United StatesLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration

New York's Appellate Division, Second Department reversed a trial court decision that granted a defendant's motion to compel acceptance of a late answer. The facts on appeal entailed plaintiff completing service on November 27, 2018 and defendant answering 43 days later on January 9, 2019. Generally, answers are due within 20 or 30 days after service is complete depending on the service method. Plaintiff alleged a negligence cause of action stemming from a sidewalk fall. She timely sued in Kings County one day before the statute of limitations expired. Goldstein v. Ilaz, 2022 NY Slip Op 04154 (2d Dept. 2022).

Defendant's counsel argued that defendant's insurance carrier retained counsel on January 4, 2019 and that the carrier caused the delay. The Appellate Division rejected that "bare allegation" as insufficient. To compel a party to accept a late answer, a movant must show a reasonable excuse for the delay and a potentially meritorious defense. A reasonable excuse

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from