A.S.L. Enterprises, Inc. v. Venus Laboratories, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

A.S.L. Enterprises, Inc. v. Venus Laboratories, Inc.

264 A.D.2d 372, 694 N.Y.S.2d 686, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8500

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

DecidedAugust 2, 1999

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 264 A.D.2d 372 (A.S.L. Enterprises, Inc. v. Venus Laboratories, Inc.) 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

A.S.L. Enterprises, Inc. v. Venus Laboratories, Inc., 264 A.D.2d 372, 694 N.Y.S.2d 686, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8500 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for breach of contract and fraud, the defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Joseph, J.), entered August 24, 1998, which denied their motion for leave to serve and file a jury demand nunc pro tunc.

Ordered that the order is reversed, as a matter of discretion, with costs, the motion is granted, and the defendants are [373]*373granted leave to serve and file a jury demand within 20 days after service upon them of a copy of this decision and order with notice of entry.

In view of the absence of prejudice to the plaintiffs, the fact that the defendants had no intention of waiving a jury trial, and their prompt application to be relieved of their default, it was an improvident exercise of discretion for the Supreme Court to have denied the defendants’ motion for leave to serve and file a jury demand (see, CPLR 4102 [a]; Breezy Point Coop. v Young, 234 AD2d 409, 410; Lane v Marshall, 89 AD2d 579; Calspan Corp. v Fingermatrix, Inc., 84 AD2d 826). Mangano, P. J., Santucci, Krausman, Florio and H. Miller, JJ., concur.

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

In an action to recover damages for breach of contract and fraud, the defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Joseph, J.), entered August 24, 1998, which denied their motion for leave to serve and file a jury demand nunc pro tunc.

Ordered that the order is reversed, as a matter of discretion, with costs, the motion is granted, and the defendants are [373]*373granted leave to serve and file a jury demand within 20 days after service upon them of a copy of this decision and order with notice of entry.

In view of the absence of prejudice to the plaintiffs, the fact that the defendants had no intention of waiving a jury trial, and their prompt application to be relieved of their default, it was an improvident exercise of discretion for the Supreme Court to have denied the defendants’ motion for leave to serve and file a jury demand (see, CPLR 4102 [a]; Breezy Point Coop. v Young, 234 AD2d 409, 410; Lane v Marshall, 89 AD2d 579; Calspan Corp. v Fingermatrix, Inc., 84 AD2d 826). Mangano, P. J., Santucci, Krausman, Florio and H. Miller, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

264 A.D.2d 372, 694 N.Y.S.2d 686, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8500, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/asl-enterprises-inc-v-venus-laboratories-inc-nyappdiv-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack