Reel v College of New Rochelle
2004 NY Slip Op 05572 [8 AD3d 208]
June 29, 2004
Appellate Division, First Department
Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.
As corrected through Wednesday, August 25, 2004


Rhonda Reel, Respondent,
v
The College of New Rochelle et al., Appellants.

[*1]

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Anne E. Targum, J.), entered on or about February 19, 2004, which granted plaintiff's motion to restore the action to the pretrial calendar, subject to certain discovery deadlines, and denied defendants' cross motion to dismiss the action and impose costs and sanctions, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

There was no showing that this action had been abandoned. Conditions precedent to dismissal for want of prosecution require joinder of issue, passage of one year since joinder, and written demand by the party seeking dismissal, by registered or certified mail, that the plaintiff serve and file a note of issue within 90 days (CPLR 3216 [b]). Questions remain, however, regarding service of the 90-day demand on plaintiff's counsel at the proper address (Chase v Scavuzzo, 87 NY2d 228 [1995]). There was also no clear showing that failure to comply with discovery was willful, contumacious or in bad faith, coupled with the absence or inadequacy of excuse (compare Castrignano v Flynn, 255 AD2d 352 [1998]; CPLR 3126). Costs and sanctions were not warranted absent a showing of frivolous conduct by plaintiff's counsel to deliberately delay or prolong the action (22 NYCRR 130-1.1). Concur—Tom, J.P., Andrias, Williams, Marlow and Gonzalez, JJ.