Bruno v. 3 West 35th Co. (88 A.D.3d 612, 2011)

The court acted within its discretion in granting plaintiff an extension of time to serve defendant, pursuant to CPLR 306-b, in the interest of justice (see Leader v Maroney, Ponzini & Spencer, 97 NY2d 95, 104-106 [2001]). Defendant received notice of the lawsuit and served an answer before the statute of limitations expired (cf. Slate v Schiavone Constr. Co., 4 NY3d 816 [2005]). Contrary to defendant’s contention, under these circumstances, plaintiff was not required to show either diligent efforts or exigent circumstances (see Leader, 97 NY2d at 105).

We have considered defendant’s remaining arguments and find them without merit. Concur — Mazzarelli, J.E, Friedman, Catterson, Renwick and Richter, JJ.