Practice point: The Appellate determined that the Supreme Court improvidently exercised its discretion in denying as untimely plaintiff's cross-motion for summary judgment. While the motion was made more than 120 days after the note of issue was filed and, therefore, was facially untimely, an untimely motion for summary judgment may be considered by the court where, as here, a timely motion was made on nearly identical grounds. The rationale is that the issues raised by the untimely motion are already properly before the motion court and, thus, the nearly identical nature of the grounds may provide the requisite good cause, pursuant to CPLR 3212 [a], to review the merits of the untimely motion.
Student note: The court, in deciding the timely motion, may search the record and award summary judgment to a nonmoving party.
Case: Wernicki v. Knipper, NY Slip Op 05324 (2d Dept. 2014)
Here is the decision.
Tomorrow's issue: A motion to dismiss for failure to prosecute is denied.