Why Trust This Analysis
This article is part of our ongoing procedural issues coverage, with 201 published articles analyzing procedural issues issues across New York State. Attorney Jason Tenenbaum brings 24+ years of hands-on experience to this analysis, drawing from his work on more than 1,000 appeals, over 100,000 no-fault cases, and recovery of over $100 million for clients throughout Nassau County, Suffolk County, Queens, Brooklyn, Manhattan, and the Bronx. For personalized legal advice about how these principles apply to your specific situation, contact our Long Island office at (516) 750-0595 for a free consultation.
New York’s Civil Practice Law and Rules (CPLR) contains specific procedural requirements that vary between different court levels. One such distinction involves the timing requirements for summary judgment motions under CPLR 3212(a), which references filing within 120 days of a “note of issue.” However, a recent Appellate Term decision highlights ongoing confusion about how this statute applies across different court systems.
The issue centers on Civil Court practice, where litigants file a “notice of trial” rather than the “note of issue” required in Supreme Court. This procedural difference has created interpretive challenges for courts attempting to apply the 120-day time period under CPLR 3212(a) across different court levels.
Jason Tenenbaum’s Analysis:
Exceptional Med. Care, P.C. v Fiduciary Ins. Co., 2014 NY Slip Op 24091 (App. Term 2d Dept 2014)
Free Consultation · No Fee Unless We Win
Does this apply to your situation?
Every case is different. Get a free, confidential case review from an experienced attorney who can tell you exactly where you stand.
3212(a) specifically states “note of issue”. When will the Appellate Division right this wrong?
“It was improper for the Civil Court to consider plaintiffs’ untimely cross motion for summary judgment in the absence of a showing by plaintiffs of good cause for not serving the motion within 120 days of the filing of the notice of trial, the Civil Court equivalent of a note of issue”
The statute talks about a note of issue, not the civil court equivalent. In Supreme Court, pro-se’s have to file a Note of Issue. This is not the case in Civil Court. This is such a perversion of the CPLR.
Key Takeaway
The Appellate Term’s equation of Civil Court’s “notice of trial” with Supreme Court’s “note of issue” represents a problematic interpretation of CPLR 3212(a). The statute specifically references a note of issue, and courts should not stretch statutory language to cover procedural documents that don’t match the statute’s plain text, regardless of functional similarities.
Related Articles
- CPLR 3212(f) discovery limitations and procedural requirements
- Understanding when summary judgment relief becomes improper under CPLR 3212(g)
- Documentary evidence limitations under CPLR 3211(a)(1)
- How trial appeals can bring up unreviewed summary judgment motions
- New York No-Fault Insurance Law
Legal Update (February 2026): Since this 2014 post, there may have been amendments to CPLR 3212(a) timing requirements or clarifying appellate decisions regarding the application of the “note of issue” language to Civil Court proceedings that use a “notice of trial.” Practitioners should verify current provisions and recent case law interpreting the 120-day deadline across different court levels, as procedural requirements and judicial interpretations may have evolved.
Legal Context
Why This Matters for Your Case
New York law is among the most complex and nuanced in the country, with distinct procedural rules, substantive doctrines, and court systems that differ significantly from other jurisdictions. The Civil Practice Law and Rules (CPLR) governs every stage of civil litigation, from service of process through trial and appeal. The Appellate Division, Appellate Term, and Court of Appeals create a rich and ever-evolving body of case law that practitioners must follow.
Attorney Jason Tenenbaum has practiced across these areas for over 24 years, writing more than 1,000 appellate briefs and publishing over 2,353 legal articles that attorneys and clients rely on for guidance. The analysis in this article reflects real courtroom experience — from motion practice in Civil Court and Supreme Court to oral arguments before the Appellate Division — and a deep understanding of how New York courts actually apply the law in practice.
About This Topic
Procedural Issues in New York Litigation
New York civil procedure governs every stage of litigation — from pleading requirements and service of process to motion practice, discovery deadlines, and trial procedures. The CPLR creates strict procedural rules that can make or break a case regardless of the underlying merits. These articles examine the procedural pitfalls, timing requirements, and strategic considerations that practitioners face in New York state courts, with a particular focus on no-fault insurance and personal injury practice.
201 published articles in Procedural Issues
Keep Reading
More Procedural Issues Analysis
How to Talk to a Judge in New York: What to Say, What to Avoid, and How to Present Yourself
Address the judge as 'Your Honor,' stand when you speak, wait to be recognized, and keep answers short and honest. A Long Island trial lawyer explains.
Feb 24, 2026
CPLR § 2106 Amendment Eliminates Affidavit Notarization Requirement: What This Means for New York Litigation
New York's CPLR 2106 permits affirmations in place of many sworn documents. See the 2024 and 2025 changes, exceptions, and historical case notes.
Feb 18, 2026
Oral application granted (untimely papers accepted) and the deeming acceptable of an affirmation of a physician in a different specialty
Court grants oral application accepting untimely expert papers and physician affirmation from different specialty in Buffalo General Hospital case.
Jun 18, 2012
A tongue twister from the Fourth Department
Fourth Department appellate court ruling on res judicata, law of the case doctrine, and prima facie requirements in no-fault insurance mailing disputes.
May 4, 2010
Written opposition – the key to beating people on procedural defects
Master written opposition strategies to defeat procedural challenges in NY courts.
Jan 25, 2009
Supplemental affirmation on a DJ case acceptable and res judicata mandates dismissal of complaint
Court rules supplemental affirmation acceptable in DJ case and res judicata mandates dismissal of no-fault complaint after prior declaratory judgment ruling.
Aug 29, 2014Was this article helpful?
Disclaimer: This article is published by the Law Office of Jason Tenenbaum, P.C. for informational and educational purposes only. It does not constitute legal advice, and no attorney-client relationship is formed by reading this content. The legal principles discussed may not apply to your specific situation, and the law may have changed since this article was last updated.
New York law varies by jurisdiction — court decisions in one Appellate Division department may not be followed in another, and local court rules in Nassau County Supreme Court differ from those in Suffolk County Supreme Court, Kings County Civil Court, or Queens County Supreme Court. The Appellate Division, Second Department (which covers Long Island, Brooklyn, Queens, and Staten Island) and the Appellate Term (which hears appeals from lower courts) each have distinct procedural requirements and precedents that affect litigation strategy.
If you need legal help with a procedural issues matter, contact our office at (516) 750-0595 for a free consultation. We serve clients throughout Long Island (Huntington, Babylon, Islip, Brookhaven, Smithtown, Riverhead, Southampton, East Hampton), Nassau County (Hempstead, Garden City, Mineola, Great Neck, Manhasset, Freeport, Long Beach, Rockville Centre, Valley Stream, Westbury, Hicksville, Massapequa), Suffolk County (Hauppauge, Deer Park, Bay Shore, Central Islip, Patchogue, Brentwood), Queens, Brooklyn, Manhattan, the Bronx, Staten Island, and Westchester County. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.
