Brault v. Wyckoff Heights Hospital

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Brault v. Wyckoff Heights Hospital

265 A.D.2d 442, 696 N.Y.S.2d 865, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10428

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

DecidedOctober 18, 1999

StatusPublished

This text of 265 A.D.2d 442 (Brault v. Wyckoff Heights Hospital) 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

Brault v. Wyckoff Heights Hospital, 265 A.D.2d 442, 696 N.Y.S.2d 865, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10428 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action to recover damages for medical malpractice, the defendants Wyckoff Heights Hospital and Wen-Pei Chang separately appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Spodek, J.), dated July 29, 1998, which granted the plaintiffs motion to extend his time to file a note of issue until December 11, 1998.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with one bill of costs.

Under the circumstances of this case, where the plaintiff appears to have been unrepresented by counsel during the period of time that he was initially allotted to file a note of issue, it was not an improvident exercise of discretion for the Supreme Court to extend his time to do so (see, CPLR 2004). 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 medical malpractice, the defendants Wyckoff Heights Hospital and Wen-Pei Chang separately appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Spodek, J.), dated July 29, 1998, which granted the plaintiffs motion to extend his time to file a note of issue until December 11, 1998.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with one bill of costs.

Under the circumstances of this case, where the plaintiff appears to have been unrepresented by counsel during the period of time that he was initially allotted to file a note of issue, it was not an improvident exercise of discretion for the Supreme Court to extend his time to do so (see, CPLR 2004). Mangano, P. J., Santucci, Krausman, Florio and H. Miller, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

265 A.D.2d 442, 696 N.Y.S.2d 865, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10428, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/brault-v-wyckoff-heights-hospital-nyappdiv-1999.