Alberti v. Dunn Engineering Associates

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Alberti v. Dunn Engineering Associates

267 A.D.2d 264, 700 N.Y.S.2d 719, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12955

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedDecember 13, 1999

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 267 A.D.2d 264 (Alberti v. Dunn Engineering Associates) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Alberti v. Dunn Engineering Associates, 267 A.D.2d 264, 700 N.Y.S.2d 719, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12955 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendant John Caldor, Inc., appeals, as limited by its brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Cannavo, J.), dated January 14, 1999, as denied its motion pursuant to CPLR 3211 to dismiss the complaint insofar as asserted against it, and granted the plaintiffs’ cross motion to the extent that the plaintiffs’ time to serve the complaint was extended for 120 days.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

Under the facts of this case, the Supreme Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in granting the plaintiffs an extension of time to serve the appellant. Santucci, J. P., Altman, Friedmann and H. Miller, JJ., concur.

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

—In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendant John Caldor, Inc., appeals, as limited by its brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Cannavo, J.), dated January 14, 1999, as denied its motion pursuant to CPLR 3211 to dismiss the complaint insofar as asserted against it, and granted the plaintiffs’ cross motion to the extent that the plaintiffs’ time to serve the complaint was extended for 120 days.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

Under the facts of this case, the Supreme Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in granting the plaintiffs an extension of time to serve the appellant. Santucci, J. P., Altman, Friedmann and H. Miller, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

267 A.D.2d 264, 700 N.Y.S.2d 719, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12955, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/alberti-v-dunn-engineering-associates-nyappdiv-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack