Landau, P.C. v. Goldstein

Landau, P.C. v Goldstein (2022 NY Slip Op 51002(U)) [*1] Landau, P.C. v Goldstein 2022 NY Slip Op 51002(U) [76 Misc 3d 138(A)] Decided on October 14, 2022 Appellate Term, First Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports. Decided on October 14, 2022 SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE TERM, FIRST DEPARTMENT PRESENT: Hagler, J.P., Tisch, Michael, JJ. 570229/21 Landau, P.C. f/k/a Morris J. Eisen, P.C. and Morris J. Eisen, Individually, Plaintiffs-Respondents, against Lloyd Goldstein, Defendant-Appellant, and Kenneth F. Kaplan, Defendant. Defendant Lloyd Goldstein, as limited by his briefs, appeals from so much of an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, New York County (Sabrina B. Kraus, J.), dated March 25, 2020, which denied his motion for summary judgment dismissing all of plaintiffs' claims as time-barred. Per Curiam. Order (Sabrina B. Kraus, J.), dated March 25, 2020, affirmed, with $10 costs. In this action to recover compensation for legal services pursuant to an alleged referral fee agreement, Civil Court properly denied defendant's Goldstein's (third) motion for summary judgment as untimely, since it was made three years after the filing of the note of issue, long past the statutory timeliness requirement of CPLR 3212(a), and defendant failed to "establish [ ] good cause for [his] belated filing" (Appleyard v Tigges, 171 AD3d 534, 536 [2019]). Moreover, defendant's motion violated the rule against successive summary judgment motions, since he previously sought summary judgment multiple times on the same grounds without "showing . . . newly discovered evidence or other sufficient justification" (Jones v 636 Holding Corp., 73 AD3d 409, 409 [2010]). We also note that many of defendant's contentions are unpreserved for appellate review. All concur THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT. Clerk of the Court Decision Date: October 14, 2022