Chomski v. Alston Cab Co.

32 A.D.2d 627, 299 N.Y.S.2d 896, 1969 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3980
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedMay 15, 1969
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 32 A.D.2d 627 (Chomski v. Alston Cab Co.) 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
Chomski v. Alston Cab Co., 32 A.D.2d 627, 299 N.Y.S.2d 896, 1969 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3980 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1969).

Opinion

Order entered March 5, 1969, preferring and advancing this personal injury action for trial, unanimously reversed and vacated, on the law and the facts in the exercise of discretion, without costs and without disbursements. We derogate in no way from our view, previously expressed, that the Justice at Pretrial Term should act as a catalyst in bringing the parties together to a fair settlement and to that end should evince all reasonable exhortation, guidance and direction, eschewing however undue pressure or any coercive measures, no matter how subtly applied. (Wolff v. Laverne, Inc., 17 A D 2d 213.) Nor do we question the objective and well-intentioned zeal of the Justice whose order is under review. Nevertheless, mere refusal on the part of defendant’s counsel, or reluctance to accede to the court’s specific view of a settlement should not be followed by judicial lightning. This is so, even when here, the tactics of defendant are open to the reproach of dilatory foot-dragging. Yet, the particular record before us is an insufficient basis to support an affirmative finding of bad faith on the part of defendant’s counsel. (Binninger v. Grillo, 28 A D 2d 1100.) And to permit this disposition to stand would only leave behind a vexatious precedent, be unfair to the general tort litigants who must stand and wait, and borrow trouble of the future. Accordingly, the case should be restored to its original position on the calendar. Concur—Capozzoli, J. P., MeGivern, Markewich, McNally and Steuer, JJ.

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

Related

Peskin v. Peskin
638 A.2d 849 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1994)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
32 A.D.2d 627, 299 N.Y.S.2d 896, 1969 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3980, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/chomski-v-alston-cab-co-nyappdiv-1969.