Barretto v. Amsterdam Avenue Realty Corp.

20 A.D.2d 891, 248 N.Y.S.2d 953, 1964 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3908
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided April 30, 1964·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Order, entered on January 22, 1964, granting conditionally defendant’s motion to dismiss the complaint for lack of prosecution, unanimously modified, on the law, on the facts and in the exercise of discretion, to the extent of granting motion to dismiss unconditionally, with $10 costs, and, as so modified, affirmed, with $20 costs and disbursements to appellant. [892]*892The action was not commenced until 32 months after the occurrence of the accident. No justifiable excuse is advanced for the long periods that ensued following joinder of issue and the completion of all pretrial procedures. Furthermore, the affidavit of merits submitted by plaintiff is unsatisfactory in that it sets forth vaguely and sketchily the proximate cause of the accident. Concur — Botein, P. J., Breitel, Valente, Stevens and Eager, JJ.

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

Barretto v. Amsterdam Avenue Realty Corp., 20 A.D.2d 891, 248 N.Y.S.2d 953, 1964 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3908 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1964).

20 A.D.2d 891 (Barretto v. Amsterdam Avenue Realty Corp.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Board of Education of Newfane Central School District No. 1 v. Newfane Teachers Ass'n
54 A.D.2d 1119 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1976)