Baczkowski v. D.A. Collins Construction Co., Inc.

89 N.Y.2d 499, 655 N.Y.S.2d 848, 678 N.E.2d 460 (1997)

From our private database of 46,200+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Baczkowski v. D.A. Collins Construction Co., Inc.

New York Court of Appeals
89 N.Y.2d 499, 655 N.Y.S.2d 848, 678 N.E.2d 460 (1997)

Facts

In November 1986, George Baczkowski (plaintiff) was injured while driving a truck owned by D.A. Collins Construction Company, Inc. (Collins) (defendant). Baczkowski sued Collins in November 1989, asserting negligence and strict-liability claims. The case largely languished until July 1994, when Collins made a demand pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules (CPLR) § 3216 that Baczkowski resume prosecution of his suit and file a notice of issue within 90 days. Baczkowski did not do either. In December 1994 (139 days after serving its 90-day demand), Collins moved, pursuant to § 3216, to dismiss Baczkowski’s complaint for failure to prosecute. Baczkowski did not oppose Collins’s motion; instead, in January 1995 (10 days before the return date on Collins’s motion and 187 days after Collins’s demand), Baczkowski filed a notice of issue. In April 1995, the supreme court granted Baczkowski 30 days to justify his delay in filing a notice of issue and to submit an affidavit of merit regarding his claims. In response, Baczkowski submitted a two-page affidavit from his attorney stating that Baczkowski’s delay was due to uncertainty regarding third-party discovery and claiming that the attorney’s secretary tried to serve a notice of issue in December 1994 but failed because she was unfamiliar with recent CPLR amendments. Instead of submitting an affidavit of merit, Baczkowski’s attorney submitted Baczkowski’s deposition transcript. The supreme court denied Collins’s motion to dismiss, concluding that Baczkowski showed justifiable excuse for his delay and that his claims had merit. The appellate division reversed, ruling that Baczkowski failed to show a justifiable excuse. Baczkowski appealed.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Ciparick, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 779,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 779,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,200 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 779,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,200 briefs - keyed to 988 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership