Copeland v. Weyerhaeuser Co.

122 A.D.2d 561, 504 N.Y.S.2d 944, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 59835
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided July 11, 1986·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

— Order unanimously affirmed, without costs. Memorandum: We affirm for the reasons stated in the memorandum decision at Special Term (Conway, J.). We add only that the court did not abuse its discretion in declining to grant a continuance of the motion in order to permit plaintiffs to obtain discovery (CPLR 3211 [d]). Plaintiffs, on a prior motion to dismiss, were granted leave to replead after obtaining discovery, yet they made no effort to compel discovery until after they amended their complaints and were faced with this second motion to dismiss. (Appeal from order of Supreme Court, Monroe County, Conway, J. — dismiss complaint.) Present — Dillon, P. J., Callahan, Boomer, Balio and Lawton, JJ.

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

Copeland v. Weyerhaeuser Co., 122 A.D.2d 561, 504 N.Y.S.2d 944, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 59835 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1986).

122 A.D.2d 561 (Copeland v. Weyerhaeuser Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Karla W. v. Carlisha K.M.
2021 NY Slip Op 02630 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2021)