Recitation, as required by CPLR 2219(a), of the papers considered in the review of this Motion:

Upon review of the foregoing papers, it is hereby ORDERED that the motion of the defendant Dorothy Hicks ("Hicks") for an order pursuant to CPLR 2201 staying the trial of the within action pending resolution of a related declaratory judgment action is DENIED for the reasons set forth below.

The plaintiff commenced this action on August 30, 2017, for alleged injuries he sustained at the premises located at 464 Van Buren Street, Brooklyn, New York. On or about February 7, [*2]2018, non-party Union Mutual Fire Insurance Company ("Union Mutual") commenced a separate declaratory judgment action entitled Union Mutual Fire Insurance Company v. Dorothy Hicks and Charles Tucker, Index No. 502497/18 (Sup. Ct. Kings Co.), seeking a declaration that Union Mutual has no obligation to defend or indemnify Hicks in connection with the instant underlying action.

By Decision and Order, dated December 17, 2020, Justice Reginald A. Boddie, granted summary judgment to Union Mutual determining that Union Mutual is under no obligation to defend or indemnify Hicks in connection with this action. On or about January 11, 2021, Hicks filed a notice of appeal. The appeal has been perfected but there is no indication that oral argument has been scheduled. The plaintiff now moves pursuant to CPLR 2201 to stay this action which has been scheduled for a pre-trial conference before the Jury Coordinating Part at least four times.

CPLR 2201 provides that "[e]xcept where otherwise prescribed by law, the court in which an action is pending may grant a stay of proceedings in a proper case, upon such terms as may be just." "A stay of an action can easily be a drastic remedy, on the simple basis that justice delayed is justice denied. It should therefore be refused unless the proponent shows good cause for granting it." Siegel, Practice Commentaries, McKinney's Cons Laws of NY, Book 7B, CPLR C2201:7 (2020). See also Ferber v. Fairfield Greenwich Grp., 2010 WL 2927274 (Sup Ct, New York County 2010).

Hicks urges that the Court should issue a stay to avoid incurring the costs of trial pending the appeal of Justice Boddie's Decision and Order in the declaratory judgment action. This is not a sufficient basis to grant a stay of an action filed in 2017 and scheduled before the Jury Coordinating Part at least four times.

Hicks' request for a stay under CPLR 2201 is akin to a request for a stay pursuant to CPLR 5519(c) but Hicks never sought to obtain a stay of Justice Boddie's December 2020 Decision and Order pursuant to CPLR 5519. Furthermore, although the good cause of Hicks' request for a stay is premised on the reversal of Justice Boddie's Decision and Order, Hicks does not attempt to explain the merits of her appeal. Finally, any claim of financial prejudice by Hicks is mitigated by the fact that if the Appellate Division issues a reversal, Hicks can seek any proper remedies against Union Mutual. See City of New York v Salvation Army, 2009 WL 606291 (Sup Ct, New York County 2009) ("Where it is determined that an insurer is obligated to defend its insured in an underlying action, the insurer is also obligated to reimburse its insured for any legal costs incurred in the insured's defense of the underlying action").

Under the circumstances, the Court declines to grant a stay of this 2017 action which has been on the calendar of the Jury Coordinating Part at least four times.

This constitutes the Order of the Court.