On April 20, 2017, the First Department issued a decision in Deutsche Bank, AG v. Vik, 2017 NY Slip Op. 03075, holding that a trial court did not abuse its discretion in granting a motion to extend time to serve made 18 months after service was contested, explaining:
The motion court exercised its discretion in a provident manner in granting the extension both for good cause shown and in the interest of justice. Although plaintiff waited to move for the extension until 18 months after service was contested, this was not unreasonable under the circumstances presented. Furthermore, other relevant factors weighed in favor of granting the motion including plaintiff’s diligence, the expiration of the statute of limitations on a number of the plaintiff’s claims and the absence of prejudice to defendant in light of his actual notice of the summons and complaint. Where some factors weigh in favor of granting an interest of justice extension and some do not, this Court will not disturb the motion court’s discretion-laden determination.
(Internal quotations and citations omitted).