Casey v. Custom Crushing & Materials, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Casey v. Custom Crushing & Materials, Inc.

309 A.D.2d 726, 765 N.Y.S.2d 268

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

DecidedOctober 6, 2003

StatusPublished

Cited by7 cases

This text of 309 A.D.2d 726 (Casey v. Custom Crushing & Materials, 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

Casey v. Custom Crushing & Materials, Inc., 309 A.D.2d 726, 765 N.Y.S.2d 268 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

In an [727]*727action to recover damages, inter alia, for personal injuries, the plaintiffs appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Glover, J.), dated July 5, 2002, as denied that branch of their cross motion which was for leave to voluntarily discontinue the action, without prejudice, pursuant to CPLR 3217 (b).

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.

The Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in denying that branch of the plaintiffs’ cross motion which was for leave to voluntarily discontinue the action, without prejudice, pursuant to CPLR 3217 (b) (see Mathias v Daily News, 301 AD2d 503 [2003]). A plaintiff should not be permitted to discontinue an action without prejudice for the purpose of avoiding an adverse order of the court (see Mathias v Daily News, supra). Altman, J.P., S. Miller, McGinity, Adams and Mastro, JJ., concur.

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

In an [727]*727action to recover damages, inter alia, for personal injuries, the plaintiffs appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Glover, J.), dated July 5, 2002, as denied that branch of their cross motion which was for leave to voluntarily discontinue the action, without prejudice, pursuant to CPLR 3217 (b).

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.

The Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in denying that branch of the plaintiffs’ cross motion which was for leave to voluntarily discontinue the action, without prejudice, pursuant to CPLR 3217 (b) (see Mathias v Daily News, 301 AD2d 503 [2003]). A plaintiff should not be permitted to discontinue an action without prejudice for the purpose of avoiding an adverse order of the court (see Mathias v Daily News, supra). Altman, J.P., S. Miller, McGinity, Adams and Mastro, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

309 A.D.2d 726, 765 N.Y.S.2d 268, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/casey-v-custom-crushing-materials-inc-nyappdiv-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack