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

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided October 6, 2003·Published·Cited by 7 cases

Opinion

In an [727] action 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] action 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.

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

Pincite

309 A.D.2d 726 (Casey v. Custom Crushing & Materials, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related