| Polsky v 145 Hudson St. Assoc., L.P. |
| 2012 NY Slip Op 07406 [100 AD3d 426] |
| November 8, 2012 |
| Appellate Division, First Department |
| Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. |
| James Polsky, Respondent, v 145 Hudson Street Associates, L.P., et al., Appellants, et al., Defendants. |
—[*1]
Mandel Bhandari LLP, New York (Rishi Bhandari of counsel), for respondent.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Lucy Billings, J.), entered March 1, 2012, which, to the extent appealed from, granted in part plaintiff's request for a preliminary conference, and denied in part defendant's motion to stay disclosure pending determination of the motions to dismiss plaintiff's complaint, unanimously affirmed, with costs.
Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in lifting the stay of discovery imposed by operation of CPLR 3214 (b) on the ground of the advanced age of defendants-appellants' principal (see Erbach Fin. Corp. v Royal Bank of Canada, 199 AD2d 87, 87-88 [1st Dept 1993]; Matter of Menahem, NYLJ, Dec. 14, 2005, 2005 NY Misc LEXIS 3830, *2 [Sur Ct, Kings County]). Contrary to defendants' contention, it is not clear that the motions to dismiss will be granted. Concur—Tom, J.P., Sweeny, Acosta, DeGrasse and Richter, JJ.