Key Takeaway
Court rules that vague "law office failure" excuse doesn't justify late opposition papers, but defendants still failed to prove their summary judgment case.
This article is part of our ongoing adjournments coverage, with 97 published articles analyzing adjournments 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.
When Courts Accept Late Papers: The “Reasonable Excuse” Standard
In New York litigation, strict deadlines govern when parties must submit their papers to the court. However, courts sometimes have discretion to consider late submissions if a party can demonstrate a reasonable excuse for the delay. The Second Department’s decision in Elusma v Jackson illustrates the high bar parties face when seeking judicial leniency for missed deadlines.
This case demonstrates that generic explanations like “law office failure” rarely satisfy courts when evaluating whether to accept late opposition papers. The decision also highlights an important procedural principle: even when a court improperly exercises discretion in one area, it may not affect the ultimate outcome if the opposing party fails to meet their legal burden.
Jason Tenenbaum’s Analysis:
Elusma v Jackson, 2020 NY Slip Op 04920 (2d Dept. 2020)
“The Supreme Court improvidently exercised its discretion in considering the plaintiffs’ opposition papers, which were submitted after the return date of the motion. The plaintiffs’ vague and unsubstantiated proffered excuse of law office failure did not constitute a reasonable excuse for the late service of their opposition papers (see CPLR 2214, ; Nakollofski v Kingsway Props., LLC, 157 AD3d 960, 961; Taylor Appraisals v Prokop, 99 AD3d 985, 985). Nevertheless, the court’s consideration of the opposition papers is of no moment since the defendants failed to establish their prima facie entitlement to summary judgment on the issue of liability.”
Key Takeaway
Courts require specific, substantiated explanations when parties seek to excuse late filings. While default scenarios often involve similar excuse standards, this case shows that procedural errors may not change outcomes when the moving party fails to meet their substantive legal burden for summary judgment.
Related Articles
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.
Keep Reading
More Adjournments Analysis
Civil Court shenanigans
Civil Court procedural delays and discovery disputes in no-fault insurance provider case, including stay orders and preclusion motions in New York courts.
Apr 24, 2021Interest of justice vacatur
New York court grants vacatur of default judgment in no-fault insurance case where claim was barred by res judicata, demonstrating interests of justice standard.
Mar 17, 2021Law Office Failure
New York's Second Department outlines when law office failure constitutes excusable conduct for missing court appearances in this mortgage foreclosure case.
Jul 24, 2019The doctor is not available on Monday/s, can I have another day please?
Court reverses trial judgment after defendant's expert unavailability on Mondays wasn't accommodated, highlighting importance of scheduling flexibility in litigation.
May 6, 2017Excusable neglect not acceptable
Court rejects attorney's heavy workload as excuse for missing deadline, emphasizing that mere neglect cannot justify vacating default orders in legal proceedings.
Mar 19, 2015Is it really the public policy of this state to adjudicate cases on their merits? Ask the Appellate Term, Second Department.
Appellate Term Second Department cases on insurance default judgments, law office failure excuses, and CPLR 2004 extensions in New York no-fault litigation.
Nov 27, 2010Common Questions
Frequently Asked Questions
What happens when a court case is adjourned in New York?
An adjournment postpones a court proceeding to a later date. In New York, adjournments may be granted for reasonable cause, but courts have discretion to deny them. Repeated adjournment requests can result in sanctions, preclusion orders, or even default judgments.
Can a no-fault arbitration be adjourned?
Yes, but no-fault arbitrations under the American Arbitration Association rules have strict scheduling requirements. Adjournments must be requested in advance and approved by the arbitrator. Failure to appear without a granted adjournment can result in a default award.
How many adjournments can I get in a New York court case?
There is no fixed limit, but courts look at the reasons for the request, the number of prior adjournments, and whether the delay prejudices the opposing party. Under the court's Individual Part Rules, judges may impose specific limits on adjournments in their courtrooms.
What is a default in New York civil litigation?
A default occurs when a party fails to respond to a legal action within the required time frame — for example, failing to answer a complaint within 20 or 30 days of service under CPLR 320. When a defendant defaults, the plaintiff can seek a default judgment under CPLR 3215. However, a defaulting party can move to vacate the default under CPLR 5015(a) by showing a reasonable excuse for the delay and a meritorious defense to the action.
What constitutes a 'reasonable excuse' to vacate a default?
Courts evaluate reasonable excuse on a case-by-case basis. Accepted excuses can include law office failure (under certain circumstances), illness, lack of actual notice of the proceeding, or excusable neglect. However, mere neglect or carelessness is generally insufficient. The movant must also demonstrate a meritorious defense — meaning they have a viable defense to the underlying claim that warrants a determination on the merits.
Was this article helpful?
About the Author
Jason Tenenbaum, Esq.
Jason Tenenbaum is the founding attorney of the Law Office of Jason Tenenbaum, P.C., headquartered at 326 Walt Whitman Road, Suite C, Huntington Station, New York 11746. With over 24 years of experience since founding the firm in 2002, Jason has written more than 1,000 appeals, handled over 100,000 no-fault insurance cases, and recovered over $100 million for clients across Long Island, Nassau County, Suffolk County, Queens, Brooklyn, Manhattan, the Bronx, and Staten Island. He is one of the few attorneys in the state who both writes his own appellate briefs and tries his own cases.
Jason is admitted to practice in New York, New Jersey, Florida, Texas, Georgia, and Michigan state courts, as well as multiple federal courts. His 2,353+ published legal articles analyzing New York case law, procedural developments, and litigation strategy make him one of the most prolific legal commentators in the state. He earned his Juris Doctor from Syracuse University College of Law.
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 adjournments 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.