good cause requirement in New York

1993Moreover, in view of the marked degree of attenuation between the Secret Service Agent to whom this statement was allegedly made and the Richmond County District Attorney’s office, it is the further opinion of this court that this is precisely the type of situation contemplated by the Court of Appeals in People v O’Doherty ( 70 NY2d 479, 486 ), when it observed that "[t]here may be instances where, given the time, place and context of the defendant’s statement to a police officer and an attenuated connection between that officer and the prosecutor [that] the untimely disclosure of the statemen

1993The Court of Appeals in People v O’Doherty ( 70 NY2d 479 [1987]) has held that the 15-day notice requirement must be strictly complied with in the absence of any established good cause for the delay.

2025In contrast to the good cause standard, "the interest of justice . . . standard . . . does not require a showing of [reasonable diligence], and [instead] permits the court to consider many factors" ( Feng Li v Peng , 190 AD3d 950, 952 ; see HSBC Bank USA, N.A. v Labin , 232 AD3d 861 , 864).

2024In contrast to the good cause standard, "the interest of justice . . . standard . . . does not require a showing of [reasonable diligence], and [instead] permits the court to consider many factors" ( Feng Li v Peng , 190 AD3d 950, 952 ).

2024Even if defendant had filed a grievance against his attorney, which was not established by the record, "any conflict was of defendant's own making, and he was not entitled to circumvent the good cause requirement by creating an artificial conflict" ( People v Walton , 14 AD3d 419, 420 [1st Dept 2005], lv denied 5 NY3d 796 [2005]; see also People v Ferrer , 166 AD3d 406 , 407 [1st Dept 2018], lv denied 32 NY3d 1171 [2019]).

2024Even if defendant had filed a grievance against his attorney, which was not established by the record, "any conflict was of defendant's own making, and he was not entitled to circumvent the good cause requirement by creating an artificial conflict" ( People v Walton , 14 AD3d 419, 420 [1st Dept 2005], lv denied 5 NY3d 796 [2005]; see also People v Ferrer , 166 AD3d 406 , 407 [1st Dept 2018], lv denied 32 NY3d 1171 [2019]).

2023Because plaintiffs were not the "real client" entitled to invoke the fiduciary exception, the good cause analysis of whether they are entitled to attorney-client communications is not applicable ( see Stock , 142 AD3d at 225-226 ).

2023Because plaintiffs were not the "real client" entitled to invoke the fiduciary exception, the good cause analysis of whether they are entitled to attorney-client communications is not applicable ( see Stock , 142 AD3d at 225-226 ).

2020Agency v Braun , 182 AD3d at 67 ; Furze v Stapen , 161 AD3d 827 , 828).

2020Agency v Braun , 182 AD3d 63 ), the court must engage in " a careful judicial analysis of the factual setting of the case and a balancing of the competing interests presented by the parties'" ( BAC Home Loans Servicing, L.P. v Herbst , 180 AD3d 980, 981 , quoting Leader v Maroney, Ponzini & Spencer , 97 NY2d at 105 ).

2014Despite petitioner’s testimony that he began treating with his physician a few months after the January 10, 2009 incident, he concedes that he did not notify his employer that he had sustained an injury or disability as a result of the incident until a year later, when his physician ultimately determined that he could not work (see Matter of Monachelli v DiNapoli, 84 AD3d 1687, 1688 [2011], lv denied 18 NY3d 802 [2011]). 1 Further, contrary to petitioner’s argument, we find nothing irrational or unreasonable about respondent’s interpretation of the regulation as providing that the event that t

2014Despite petitioner’s testimony that he began treating with his physician a few months after the January 10, 2009 incident, he concedes that he did not notify his employer that he had sustained an injury or disability as a result of the incident until a year later, when his physician ultimately determined that he could not work (see Matter of Monachelli v DiNapoli, 84 AD3d 1687, 1688 [2011], lv denied 18 NY3d 802 [2011]). 1 Further, contrary to petitioner’s argument, we find nothing irrational or unreasonable about respondent’s interpretation of the regulation as providing that the event that t

2014Despite petitioner’s testimony that he began treating with his physician a few months after the January 10, 2009 incident, he concedes that he did not notify his employer that he had sustained an injury or disability as a result of the incident until a year later, when his physician ultimately determined that he could not work (see Matter of Monachelli v DiNapoli, 84 AD3d 1687, 1688 [2011], lv denied 18 NY3d 802 [2011]). 1 Further, contrary to petitioner’s argument, we find nothing irrational or unreasonable about respondent’s interpretation of the regulation as providing that the event that t

2014Despite petitioner’s testimony that he began treating with his physician a few months after the January 10, 2009 incident, he concedes that he did not notify his employer that he had sustained an injury or disability as a result of the incident until a year later, when his physician ultimately determined that he could not work (see Matter of Monachelli v DiNapoli, 84 AD3d 1687, 1688 [2011], lv denied 18 NY3d 802 [2011]). 1 Further, contrary to petitioner’s argument, we find nothing irrational or unreasonable about respondent’s interpretation of the regulation as providing that the event that t

2014Despite petitioner’s testimony that he began treating with his physician a few months after the January 10, 2009 incident, he concedes that he did not notify his employer that he had sustained an injury or disability as a result of the incident until a year later, when his physician ultimately determined that he could not work (see Matter of Monachelli v DiNapoli, 84 AD3d 1687, 1688 [2011], lv denied 18 NY3d 802 [2011]). 1 Further, contrary to petitioner’s argument, we find nothing irrational or unreasonable about respondent’s interpretation of the regulation as providing that the event that t

2014Despite petitioner’s testimony that he began treating with his physician a few months after the January 10, 2009 incident, he concedes that he did not notify his employer that he had sustained an injury or disability as a result of the incident until a year later, when his physician ultimately determined that he could not work (see Matter of Monachelli v DiNapoli, 84 AD3d 1687, 1688 [2011], lv denied 18 NY3d 802 [2011]). 1 Further, contrary to petitioner’s argument, we find nothing irrational or unreasonable about respondent’s interpretation of the regulation as providing that the event that t

2000Weiner’s theory that the codicil resulted from the family’s actions is based upon speculation, which is not enough to satisfy the good cause requirement to challenge a propounded instrument (see, Matter of Hatzistefanou, 77 Misc 2d 594 ; Matter of Molnar, 76 Misc 2d 126 ; Matter of Lerner, 72 Misc 2d 592 ).

1996Some courts have permitted SCPA 1404 examinations by a fiduciary named in a prior will only where other objectants had requested such examinations (see, Matter of Silverman, supra, at 127; Matter of Molnar, 76 Misc 2d 126 ; Matter of Lerner, 72 Misc 2d 592 ), while other courts have refused to allow them where there were neutral parties (e.g., the Attorney-General) who could, but did not, pursue such opportunity (see, Matter of Lachman, 100 Misc 2d 21, 28 ).

2000Weiner’s theory that the codicil resulted from the family’s actions is based upon speculation, which is not enough to satisfy the good cause requirement to challenge a propounded instrument (see, Matter of Hatzistefanou, 77 Misc 2d 594 ; Matter of Molnar, 76 Misc 2d 126 ; Matter of Lerner, 72 Misc 2d 592 ).

1996Some courts have permitted SCPA 1404 examinations by a fiduciary named in a prior will only where other objectants had requested such examinations (see, Matter of Silverman, supra, at 127; Matter of Molnar, 76 Misc 2d 126 ; Matter of Lerner, 72 Misc 2d 592 ), while other courts have refused to allow them where there were neutral parties (e.g., the Attorney-General) who could, but did not, pursue such opportunity (see, Matter of Lachman, 100 Misc 2d 21, 28 ).

2025As the documentary evidence upon which petitioner relies fails to describe the nature of the accident and the resulting injuries alleged, substantial evidence supports respondent's finding that petitioner cannot avail herself of the good cause exception ( see Matter of Martinez v DiNapoli , 219 AD3d at 993-994; cf. Matter of Cook v DiNapoli , 113 AD3d at 950-951 ; Matter of Wilson v New York State & Local Policemen's & Firemen's Retirement Sys. , 288 AD2d at 603 ).

2025As the documentary evidence upon which petitioner relies fails to describe the nature of the accident and the resulting injuries alleged, substantial evidence supports respondent's finding that petitioner cannot avail herself of the good cause exception ( see Matter of Martinez v DiNapoli , 219 AD3d at 993-994; cf. Matter of Cook v DiNapoli , 113 AD3d at 950-951 ; Matter of Wilson v New York State & Local Policemen's & Firemen's Retirement Sys. , 288 AD2d at 603 ).

2025Plaintiff further contends that the complaint sufficiently pleads causes of action for negligence, citing Doe v. Ascend Charter Schools, 121 NYS3d 285 (2d Dept 2020), where a motion to dismiss was denied despite general allegations of prior notice of sexual misconduct.

2022The court adjourned the matter to September 15, 2017, on which date the People were again not ready to proceed because, the prosecutor explained,{**78 Misc 3d at 12} the arresting officer was on vacation.

2020Here, we agree with the Supreme Court's determination that the plaintiffs were entitled to an extension of time to serve the defendants under either the good cause standard ( see Emigrant Bank v Estate of Robinson , 144 AD3d 1084, 1085 ) or the interest of justice standard ( see State of New York Mtge.

2020Agency v Braun , 182 AD3d 63 ), the court must engage in " a careful judicial analysis of the factual setting of the case and a balancing of the competing interests presented by the parties'" ( BAC Home Loans Servicing, L.P. v Herbst , 180 AD3d 980, 981 , quoting Leader v Maroney, Ponzini & Spencer , 97 NY2d at 105 ).

2018When defendant made an unfounded ethics complaint against counsel, "any conflict was of defendant's own making, and he was not entitled to circumvent the good cause requirement by creating an artificial conflict" ( People v Walton , 14 AD3d 419, 420 [1st Dept 2015], lv denied 5 NY3d 795 [2005]).

2018The Supreme Court's decision in Barker v. Wingo is particularly instructive on the good cause analysis, although there the Court ultimately concluded that Barker's speedy trial right was not violated, primarily because he did not assert that right and indeed "did not want a speedy trial" ( Barker , 407 U.S. at 534 , 92 S.Ct. 2182 ).

2018The Supreme Court's decision in Barker v. Wingo is particularly instructive on the good cause analysis, although there the Court ultimately concluded that Barker's speedy trial right was not violated, primarily because he did not assert that right and indeed "did not want a speedy trial" ( Barker , 407 U.S. at 534 , 92 S.Ct. 2182 ).

2018Unlike the federal speedy trial factors, the state Taranovich factors do not separately consider whether the defendant has asserted his or her right to a speedy trial ( compare *313 Taranovich , 37 N.Y.2d at 445 , 373 N.Y.S.2d 79 , 335 N.E.2d 303 , with Barker , 407 U.S. at 528 -530 , 92 S.Ct. 2182 ).

2018Unlike the federal speedy trial factors, the state Taranovich factors do not separately consider whether the defendant has asserted his or her right to a speedy trial ( compare *313 Taranovich , 37 N.Y.2d at 445 , 373 N.Y.S.2d 79 , 335 N.E.2d 303 , with Barker , 407 U.S. at 528 -530 , 92 S.Ct. 2182 ).