Caruso v. International House of Pancakes 228 A.D.2d 462, 643 NYS2d 1023

Since the plaintiff failed to address the merits of his case in opposition to the defendant’s motion to dismiss pursuant to CPLR 3012 (b), the court erred as a matter of law by granting the motion conditionally (see, Kel Mgt. v Rogers & Wells, 64 NY2d 904, 905; Stolowitz v Mount Sinai Hosp., 60 NY2d 685; Rosano v County of Nassau, 208 AD2d 704, 705; Sanders v Van Dome Mgt., 191 AD2d 630). O’Brien, J. P., Ritter, Pizzuto and Altman, JJ., concur.