Barcelo v Queens Blvd. Realty Co., LLC

Supreme Court, Kings County

Decided on June 8, 2026

Index No. 519855/2024

Aaron D. Maslow, J.

The following papers efiled on NYSCEF were used on these motions: 1, 5, 9, 11, 14-15, 23, 28-52.

Upon the foregoing papers, having heard oral argument^FN1, and due deliberation having been had, the within motions are determined as follows.

Background

Plaintiff commenced this premises liability action after he allegedly tripped and fell on the sidewalk in front of 109-20 Queens Boulevard in Queens on September 27, 2023 (see[*2]NYSCEF Doc Nos. 1, 32, 35). Plaintiff filed the summons and complaint on July 23, 2024 (see NYSCEF Doc Nos. 1, 15, 32, 35). Defendants The Georgian Condominium and Veritas Property Management LLC answered on August 22, 2024 and served discovery demands, including a demand for a verified bill of particulars (see NYSCEF Doc Nos. 5, 35). Defendant Queens Boulevard Realty Co., LLC answered on November 5, 2024 and served its own demands (see NYSCEF Doc Nos. 9, 11, 32).

Bogoraz Law Group, P.C. later moved by order to show cause to withdraw as counsel for Plaintiff (see NYSCEF Doc Nos. 14-15). Defendants The Georgian Condominium and Veritas Property Management LLC partially opposed that application and asked the Court to limit any stay and require Plaintiff to appear or face dismissal (see NYSCEF Doc No. 23). The Court granted the withdrawal motion by order entered on December 8, 2025, stayed the action through January 30, 2026, and directed Plaintiff to appear pro se or through new counsel by January 23, 2026 or face dismissal on motion by Defendants (see NYSCEF Doc Nos. 28-30, 32, 35). Bogoraz then served the order with notice of entry, a notice of future case activity, and a notice of party information, and Bogoraz filed a notice of compliance (see NYSCEF Doc Nos. 28-30). The record does not show that Plaintiff filed a pro se notice of appearance or that new counsel filed a notice of appearance for him after the stay expired (see NYSCEF Doc Nos. 32, 35, 51).

Defendant Queens Boulevard Realty Co., LLC filed Motion Sequence No. 2 on March 5, 2026 (see NYSCEF Doc Nos. 31-33). Defendants The Georgian Condominium and Veritas Property Management LLC filed Motion Sequence No. 3 on March 6, 2026 (see NYSCEF Doc Nos. 34-36). The motions sought dismissal of Plaintiff's complaint due to his failure to appear either by counsel or pro se. The Court adjourned both motions on April 22, 2026 because each movant had not complied with IAS Part 2 Rules that required additional service and motion calendar notice to a self-represented party, and the Court directed each movant to re-serve and file proof of compliance (see NYSCEF Doc Nos. 41, 43). Defendants The Georgian Condominium and Veritas Property Management LLC then filed an amended notice of motion, mailed Plaintiff a letter with the interim order and Part 2 Rules, and filed affidavits of service that showed NYSCEF service, first-class mail, and certified mail (see NYSCEF Doc Nos. 44-45, 47-48). Defendant Queens Boulevard Realty Co., LLC sent Plaintiff a similar letter, enclosed the interim order and motion papers, and filed proof of NYSCEF service, first-class mail, and certified mail (see NYSCEF Doc Nos. 49-50). Motion Sequence No. 2 and Motion Sequence No. 3 were calendared for June 5, 2026 (see NYSCEF Doc No. 51). The record lacks opposition papers on either motion.

Movants' Contentions

Defendant Queens Boulevard Realty Co., LLC argues in Motion Sequence No. 2 that the December 8, 2025 order relieved Plaintiff's counsel, stayed the action, directed Plaintiff to appear pro se or through new counsel by the date stated in the order, and authorized a Defendant to move to dismiss if Plaintiff did not do so (see NYSCEF Doc Nos. 28-32). Defendant Queens Boulevard Realty Co., LLC further argues that Plaintiff did not appear pro se or through new counsel after the stay expired, and it therefore seeks dismissal of the complaint as against it (see NYSCEF Doc Nos. 31-32, 39, 49).

Defendants The Georgian Condominium and Veritas Property Management LLC argue in Motion Sequence No. 3 that Plaintiff ignored the withdrawal order, did not appear pro se or [*3]through new counsel after the stay expired, and left the complaint subject to dismissal with prejudice (see NYSCEF Doc Nos. 34-35, 44). They also argue that they previously asked the Court, in partial opposition to the withdrawal motion, to require Plaintiff to appear after the stay and to dismiss the action with prejudice if Plaintiff failed to do so (see NYSCEF Doc Nos. 23, 34-35, 44).

Opposition

The record does not contain papers in opposition.

Discussion

New York courts enforce court orders and court-ordered deadlines. Court-ordered time frames are requirements, not options, and parties may not ignore them without consequence. A conditional order becomes absolute when a party fails to comply with its terms. A party who seeks relief from the effect of such a default must demonstrate a reasonable excuse for the default and a potentially meritorious claim. (See Miceli v State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 3 NY3d 725, 726-727 [2004]; Kihl v Pfeffer, 94 NY2d 118 [1999]; Winters v City of New York, 234 AD3d 805, 805-806 [2d Dept 2025].)

IAS Part 2 also may require additional service and notification when a motion affects a self-represented party or a nonappearing party. When a movant fails to comply with those rules, the Court may adjourn the motion and direct the movant to cure the defect. Once the movant cures the defect, the Court may reach the merits. (See Meleshkov v Sulyma, 84 Misc 3d 1246[A], 2024 NY Slip Op 51693[U], *2-4 [Sup Ct, Kings County 2024].)

The December 8, 2025 order did not merely relieve counsel. The order stayed the action through January 30, 2026, directed Plaintiff to appear pro se or through new counsel by the date specified in the order, and warned that a defendant could move to dismiss if Plaintiff did not comply (see NYSCEF Doc Nos. 28-30, 32, 35). Bogoraz Law Group, P.C. served that order with notice of entry, a notice of future case activity, and a notice of party information, and the Bogoraz firm filed a notice of compliance (see NYSCEF Doc Nos. 28-30). The record does not show that Plaintiff appeared pro se or through new counsel after the stay expired (see NYSCEF Doc Nos. 32, 35, 51).

The Court also finds that both movants cured the service and notification defects that first prevented these motions from being considered. The Court adjourned both motions on April 22, 2026 because each movant had not complied with IAS Part 2 Rules that required additional service and motion calendar notice to a self-represented party (see NYSCEF Doc Nos. 41, 43). Defendants The Georgian Condominium and Veritas Property Management LLC then mailed Plaintiff the amended motion papers, the interim order, and the Part 2 Rules, and filed affidavits that documented first-class mail, certified mail, and NYSCEF service (see NYSCEF Doc Nos. 44-45, 47, 48). Defendant Queens Boulevard Realty Co., LLC then mailed Plaintiff the motion papers, the interim order, and the Part 2 Rules, and filed affidavits that documented first-class mail, certified mail, and NYSCEF service (see NYSCEF Doc Nos. 49, 50). The Court therefore reaches the merits of both motions.

Plaintiff did not submit opposition papers. Plaintiff did not request more time. Plaintiff did not show a reasonable excuse for failing to appear pro se or through new counsel after the [*4]stay expired. Plaintiff also did not show a potentially meritorious claim in response to these motions.

On this record, Plaintiff ignored a direct court order, did not appear after the Court relieved counsel, and did not oppose either dismissal motion after both movants cured the service defects. The Court enforces the December 8, 2025 order. Therefore, the Court GRANTS Motion Sequence No. 2 and Motion Sequence No. 3 and DISMISSES the complaint with prejudice in its entirety.

Conclusion

It is hereby ORDERED as follows:

Motion Sequence No. 2 by Defendant Queens Boulevard Realty Co., LLC is GRANTED; and it is further ORDERED that Motion Sequence No. 3 by Defendants The Georgian Condominium and Veritas Property Management LLC is GRANTED; and it is further ORDERED that the complaint is DISMISSED with prejudice in its entirety; and it is further ORDERED that Defendants shall serve a copy of this Decision and Order with notice of entry within thirty (30) days of entry. The Clerk shall enter judgment in accordance herewith.