On July 29, 2022, Justice Knipel of the Kings County Commercial Division issued a decision in Sooklal v. 107 Steuben St., LLC, 2022 NY Slip Op. 32620(U), relieving a party from a failure to serve a timely request for a jury trial, explaining:
Any party served with a note of issue that does not contain a jury demand may file and serve such a demand within 15 days of service of a note of issue. If no party serves a jury demand as provided in CPLR 4102, the right to a jury trial is deemed waived by all parties. However, the court may relieve a party from the effect of failing to comply with this section if no undue prejudice to the rights of another party would result.
‘The decision of whether to relieve a party from a failure to serve a timely request for a jury trial lies within the sound discretion of the trial court. A motion pursuant to CPLR 4102(e) for an extension of time to file a demand for a jury trial must be based upon a factual showing that the earlier waiver of that right was the result of either inadvertence or other excusable conduct indicating a lack of intention to waive such a right.
Here, the court exercises its discretion in granting defendants’ motion as defendants have demonstrated that their failure to serve and timely file a jury demand was inadvertent and due to law office failure. In that regard, defendants’ previous filing a jury demand after the plaintiff filed the first note of issue demonstrates· their desire to proceed with a jury trial. The court credits defendants’ counsel’s contention he believed the first jury demand to still be in effect after the first note of issue was vacated. In addition, plaintiff has not demonstrated that she will be prejudiced by all owing defendants to file a jury demand, especially since defendants previously filed one. Any delay in scheduling a trial date after such filing would not be specifically attributed to defendants’ filing of the jury demand.
(Internal citations omitted).