Bythewood v. 333 East Broadway Owners Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Bythewood v. 333 East Broadway Owners Corp.

201 A.D.2d 604, 608 N.Y.S.2d 234, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1442

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided February 22, 1994·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

In an action to recover damages, inter alia, for breach of contract and fraud, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (O’Brien, J.), entered January 21, 1992, which, in effect, denied his motion to dismiss the first and second counterclaims as abandoned for failure to submit a timely judgment upon an order granting that branch of the [605] defendants’ cross motion which was for summary judgment on those counterclaims, and, in effect, granted the defendants’ cross motion for leave to submit an untimely judgment.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

We agree with the Supreme Court that ongoing settlement negotiations represented good cause for the defendants’ failure to timely submit a judgment (see, 22 NYCRR 202.48 [b]; Barnett v Star Mech. Corp., 171 AD2d 142; Woodward v City of New York, 119 AD2d 749). Bracken, J. P., Miller, Copertino, Santucci and Altman, JJ., concur.

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

In an action to recover damages, inter alia, for breach of contract and fraud, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (O’Brien, J.), entered January 21, 1992, which, in effect, denied his motion to dismiss the first and second counterclaims as abandoned for failure to submit a timely judgment upon an order granting that branch of the [605] defendants’ cross motion which was for summary judgment on those counterclaims, and, in effect, granted the defendants’ cross motion for leave to submit an untimely judgment.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

We agree with the Supreme Court that ongoing settlement negotiations represented good cause for the defendants’ failure to timely submit a judgment (see, 22 NYCRR 202.48 [b]; Barnett v Star Mech. Corp., 171 AD2d 142; Woodward v City of New York, 119 AD2d 749). Bracken, J. P., Miller, Copertino, Santucci and Altman, JJ., concur.

Bythewood v. 333 East Broadway Owners Corp., 201 A.D.2d 604, 608 N.Y.S.2d 234, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1442 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

201 A.D.2d 604 (Bythewood v. 333 East Broadway Owners Corp.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related