Cooper v. Martin
This text of 222 A.D. 765 (Cooper v. Martin) 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.
Opinion
Order granting plaintiff’s motion to serve second amended complaint and denying defendants) motion to dismiss complaint for lack of prosecution reversed upon the law and the facts, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, motion for leave to serve second amended complaint denied, with ten dollars costs, and defendants’ motion to dismiss complaint granted, with ten dollars costs, because of the unreasonable delay in prosecuting the action after the beginning of the reference. The fact that defendants had interposed a counterclaim did not affect their right to move for a dismissal because of plaintiff’s unreasonable delay. (See Fleischman v. Mengis, 113 N. Y. Supp. 515.) Jacot v. Marks (26 Misc. 670), cited by respondent as authority to the contrary, was reversed. (Jacot v. Marks, 46 App. Div. 531.) Upon consent of defendants, their counterclaim is dismissed, without costs. Lazansky, P. J., Rich, Kapper, Seeger and Carswell, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
222 A.D. 765, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cooper-v-martin-nyappdiv-1927.