Q: If a judge has 60 days to make a decision; what happens after that if the time has run out? Do i still get a trial?

A: The 60 day period for a decision is not set in stone. If the motion to dismiss is granted then your trial will not proceed as the case os dismissed. If it is not granted then the case will go to trial. Dates for trial are assigned so the court can clear it's calendar for those days, if the trial isa necessary.

A: First, a motion to dismiss scuttles the trial dates until it is decided. After the Court issues a Decision on the motion, there should be a Trial Conference to schedule new dates and procedures for pre-trial disclosure.

And, while the CPLR (not even the Uniform Trial Rules promulgated by the Courts) requires that motions be decided in 60 days (CPLR 2219), there is nothing in the Rules that says what happens when the Court ignores this time limit. The only thing to do is to write a letter to the Judge to "advise" him or her that the motion is outstanding and provide some factual support for prejudice to your rights. It should be respectful but firm. If another 45 days goes by without any response, I suggest that you send another letter, this one a bit more strident. Unfortunately, this situation is rampant in New York Courts right now and something needs to be done.

A: This is precisely the kind of question we here on Justin are specifically prohibited from answering. We are not the asker's attorney and as such we do not know any of the operative facts of this asker's case. We are therefore prohibited from offering tips and tricks as to how to proceed, however, we can educate and teach askers about the law.

Apparently this is a child custody matter in a family court in the state of New York somewhere. We are not told why the asker filed both a petition and an order to show cause. Conferences are the norm during the discovery period of any special court litigation (family court is a "special" court) where statuses are shared and attempts at resolution of the case are made. The setting of trial dates is an automatic step to preserve valuable time for hearings. These dates can be vacated or can be adjusted for more conferences although as to this asker's case, we know of nothing of his case and do not know whether trial will occur or not.

There is no such thing as a "counter-OSC" in the civil practice law and rules, so we have no clue as to what the motions are for. Objecting to in-court service though technically correct is a bad idea because the opponent can serve a garbage can and allege proper service leaving the asker in the dark. If the judge favors the opposing parent, then garbage service can work unfair prejudice against the asker in the case. We cannot comment open the response the asker filed with an affidavit of service.

Article 22 of the CPLR states that upon submission of a fully brief motion, the court has sixty days to provide a written response with reasoning contained therein. However, each judge is different and each court is staffed and equipped differently. Sixty days can become one hundred days and there is nothing to do about this. There is also the issue of judicial competence. If this is a New York City case, then the mayor of the city appoints family court judges. These judges may never have practiced law before, and the appellate division will likely affirm their orders and decisions no matter how cockamamie those may be to protect the system from ridicule.

We simply do not know what is happening here other than a pro se parent is appearing in a policy court where an American family model is being forced down his throat. Facts matter for little in many cases where the judge is new at this practice. The aim is to fit a square peg into a round hole, and all the rest of civil practice is tailored around that social policy objective. However, we simply do not know anything of this asker's case to provide a cogent answer to his question.