Majority
In an action to foreclose a mortgage, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Martin, J.), dated July 7, 2014, which denied its motion to restore the action to active status and to refer the action to the settlement conference part.
Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, without costs or disbursements, and the plaintiff’s motion to restore the action to active status and to refer the action to the settlement conference part is granted.
The plaintiff commenced this foreclosure action in 2005 and, following the defendants’ default, obtained an order of reference in 2007. Thereafter, in late 2011, at a time when the
The Supreme Court erred in denying the plaintiff’s unopposed motion to restore, since CPLR 3404 is inapplicable to pre-note of issue actions such as this one (see Cerrone v North Shore — Long Is. Jewish Health Sys., Inc., 134 AD3d 874 , 875 [2015]; Kapnisakis v Woo, 114 AD3d 729 , 730 [2014]; Lopez v Imperial Delivery Serv., 282 AD2d 190 , 198 [2001]). Therefore, since this action could not properly be marked off pursuant to CPLR 3404, the plaintiff was not obligated to move to restore within any specified time frame (see Yunga v Yonkers Contr. Co., Inc., 134 AD3d 1031 , 1033 [2015]; Arroyo v Board of Educ. of City of N.Y., 110 AD3d 17 , 21 [2013]; Rakha v Pinnacle Bus Servs., 98 AD3d 657 , 657-658 [2012]; Farley v Danaher Corp., 295 AD2d 559 , 560 [2002]), and the plaintiff was not obligated to demonstrate a reasonable excuse for its failure to appear on the scheduled conference date and a potentially meritorious claim (see Murray v Smith Corp., 296 AD2d 445 , 446 [2002]; Farley v Danaher Corp., 295 AD2d at 560 ). Accordingly, the court should have granted the plaintiff’s motion to restore the action to active status and to refer the action to the settlement conference part. Mastro,
J.P., Dickerson, Austin and Roman, JJ., concur.
Cases cited
- Cerrone v. North Shore-Long Island Jewish Health System, Inc. 134 AD3d 874 at 875 p. 1100
- Kapnisakis v. Woo 114 AD3d 729 at 730 p. 1100
- Lopez v. Imperial Delivery Service, Inc. 282 AD2d 190 at 198 p. 1100
- Yunga v. Yonkers Contracting Co. 134 AD3d 1031 at 1033 p. 1100
- Arroyo v. Board of Education 110 AD3d 17 at 21 p. 1100
- Rakha v. Pinnacle Bus Services 98 AD3d 657 at 657-658 p. 1100
- Murray v. T.W. Smith Corp. 296 AD2d 445 at 446 p. 1100