Charet v. Man-Dell Food Stores, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Charet v. Man-Dell Food Stores, Inc.

208 A.D.2d 489, 616 N.Y.S.2d 1017, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9318

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

DecidedOctober 3, 1994

StatusPublished

This text of 208 A.D.2d 489 (Charet v. Man-Dell Food Stores, 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

Charet v. Man-Dell Food Stores, Inc., 208 A.D.2d 489, 616 N.Y.S.2d 1017, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9318 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Milano, J.), dated April 29, 1993, which denied their motion to sever the third party action and to restore the main action to the trial calendar with a special preference.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

Given the plaintiffs’ own delay in prosecuting the main action, we find that the Supreme Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in denying the plaintiffs’ motion for a severance of the third party action on the grounds that delay in its prosecution would prejudice the plaintiffs (see, CPLR 1010). In addition, since the Supreme Court has indicated that it intends to insure that prosecution of the third party action proceeds expeditiously and that when discovery is complete the plaintiffs will be given a preference under CPLR 3403 (a) (4), we find no basis to grant the other relief requested by the plaintiffs. Thompson, J. P., Miller, O’Brien, Santucci and Joy, 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 personal injuries, the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Milano, J.), dated April 29, 1993, which denied their motion to sever the third party action and to restore the main action to the trial calendar with a special preference.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

Given the plaintiffs’ own delay in prosecuting the main action, we find that the Supreme Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in denying the plaintiffs’ motion for a severance of the third party action on the grounds that delay in its prosecution would prejudice the plaintiffs (see, CPLR 1010). In addition, since the Supreme Court has indicated that it intends to insure that prosecution of the third party action proceeds expeditiously and that when discovery is complete the plaintiffs will be given a preference under CPLR 3403 (a) (4), we find no basis to grant the other relief requested by the plaintiffs. Thompson, J. P., Miller, O’Brien, Santucci and Joy, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

208 A.D.2d 489, 616 N.Y.S.2d 1017, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9318, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/charet-v-man-dell-food-stores-inc-nyappdiv-1994.