Besco Steel Erectors, Inc. v. Mecho Shade Systems, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Besco Steel Erectors, Inc. v. Mecho Shade Systems, Inc.

246 A.D.2d 334, 666 N.Y.S.2d 915

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

DecidedJanuary 8, 1998

StatusPublished

This text of 246 A.D.2d 334 (Besco Steel Erectors, Inc. v. Mecho Shade Systems, 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

Besco Steel Erectors, Inc. v. Mecho Shade Systems, Inc., 246 A.D.2d 334, 666 N.Y.S.2d 915 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York [335]*335County (Emily Goodman, J.), entered August 13, 1996, which denied plaintiffs motion to vacate a prior order, entered on default, dismissing the complaint for want of prosecution, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The motion was properly denied for failure to offer an adequate excuse for either the default in opposing the motion to dismiss for want of prosecution or the failure to prosecute for virtually the entire eight-year period between the commencement of the action and the making of the instant motion. We also note that plaintiffs showing on the merits is very weak. Concur—Rosenberger, J. P., Wallach, Rubin, Williams and Torn* JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, New York [335]*335County (Emily Goodman, J.), entered August 13, 1996, which denied plaintiffs motion to vacate a prior order, entered on default, dismissing the complaint for want of prosecution, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The motion was properly denied for failure to offer an adequate excuse for either the default in opposing the motion to dismiss for want of prosecution or the failure to prosecute for virtually the entire eight-year period between the commencement of the action and the making of the instant motion. We also note that plaintiffs showing on the merits is very weak. Concur—Rosenberger, J. P., Wallach, Rubin, Williams and Torn* JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

246 A.D.2d 334, 666 N.Y.S.2d 915, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/besco-steel-erectors-inc-v-mecho-shade-systems-inc-nyappdiv-1998.