Key Takeaway
Court rules on late affidavit submission in personal injury case, examining when briefing schedule violations should be excused based on prejudice rather than strict timing requirements.
Mughal v Rajput, 2013 NY Slip Op 03466 (2d Dept. 2013)
“Although the defendants initially opposed the motion solely through the submission of an attorney’s affirmation, about two weeks later, and prior to the adjourned return date of the motion, they submitted an affidavit from Rajput….”
“Contrary to the plaintiffs’ contention, the Supreme Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in considering Rajput’s affidavit. Although the affidavit was not timely submitted, the plaintiffs had an opportunity to respond to it, and were not prejudiced thereby (see Lawrence v Celtic Holdings, LLC, 85 AD3d 874, 875; Turturro v City of New York, 77 AD3d 732, 734; Valure v Century 21 Grand, 35 AD3d 591, 592; Hoffman v Kessler, 28 AD3d 718; Franklin v Omni Sagamore Hotel, 5 AD3d 348; Vlassis v Corines, 254 AD2d 273).”
Here is my favorite Civil Kings briefing schedule horror story. Motion for summary judgment adjourned and the forced stipulation of adjournment is submitted for your signature. Arbitrary dates are given to interpose cross-moving and responsive papers, i.e. “the briefing schedule”. Your papers are late, but there is still 1-2 months to go prior to the final return date on the motion. Adversary argues your papers are late but presents sufficient evidence to oppose your motion.
Result: Adversary wins because you violated the sacrosanct briefing schedule. As seen here and in other cases, the question should be prejudice not form over substance. My vote is to do away with the briefing schedule – it is a trap for the unwary. Were the papers served in accordance with CPLR 2214? If yes, fine. If no, then you have a problem.
Related Articles
- Combating litigation delay tactics in New York no-fault insurance cases
- Single motion rule and statute of limitations guidance
- How form defects can be fixed in reply papers
- When parties get multiple chances to correct procedural mistakes
- New York No-Fault Insurance Law
Legal Update (February 2026): CPLR 2214 governing motion practice and briefing schedules may have been subject to amendments or procedural updates since 2013. Additionally, court rules regarding briefing schedules and the acceptance of untimely submissions may have evolved, particularly given ongoing efforts to modernize civil practice rules. Practitioners should verify current CPLR provisions and local court rules regarding motion practice deadlines and judicial discretion in accepting late papers.
