Addison v. 1851 Seventh Avenue Holding Corp.

New York Supreme Court

Addison v. 1851 Seventh Avenue Holding Corp.

42 Misc. 2d 881, 249 N.Y.S.2d 238, 1964 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1881

DecidedApril 14, 1964

StatusPublished

This text of 42 Misc. 2d 881 (Addison v. 1851 Seventh Avenue Holding Corp.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Addison v. 1851 Seventh Avenue Holding Corp., 42 Misc. 2d 881, 249 N.Y.S.2d 238, 1964 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1881 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1964).

Pincite

Opinion

William C. Hecht, Jr., J.

Motion for an order staying any further prosecution of this action by plaintiff until plaintiff pays the costs awarded defendant in the prior action between the parties on the same cause, which was discontinued, is denied. Plaintiff is a recipient of welfare from the City of New York, and her inability to pay the costs awarded is apparent. While, in the past, such financial inability has often been held an insufficient excuse to avoid a stay, these cases were decided under the then effective section 1520 of the Civil Practice Act, or its terms mandated such a stay. (See Wilner v. Independent Order Ahawas Israel, 122 App. Div. 615; McDevitt v. Hyat, 185 App. Div. 370; 23 Carmody-Wait, New York Practice, p. 352, § 307; cf. CPLR 5101, 8106, 8401.) Under the facts presented (the defendant’s financial inability to pay the costs coupled with the circumstances surrounding the discontinuance of the prior action), the exercise of the court’s discretion, in allowing the maintenance of this action, is warranted.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

William C. Hecht, Jr., J.

Motion for an order staying any further prosecution of this action by plaintiff until plaintiff pays the costs awarded defendant in the prior action between the parties on the same cause, which was discontinued, is denied. Plaintiff is a recipient of welfare from the City of New York, and her inability to pay the costs awarded is apparent. While, in the past, such financial inability has often been held an insufficient excuse to avoid a stay, these cases were decided under the then effective section 1520 of the Civil Practice Act, or its terms mandated such a stay. (See Wilner v. Independent Order Ahawas Israel, 122 App. Div. 615; McDevitt v. Hyat, 185 App. Div. 370; 23 Carmody-Wait, New York Practice, p. 352, § 307; cf. CPLR 5101, 8106, 8401.) Under the facts presented (the defendant’s financial inability to pay the costs coupled with the circumstances surrounding the discontinuance of the prior action), the exercise of the court’s discretion, in allowing the maintenance of this action, is warranted.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

42 Misc. 2d 881, 249 N.Y.S.2d 238, 1964 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1881, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/addison-v-1851-seventh-avenue-holding-corp-nysupct-1964.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack