Corvino v. Reese

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Corvino v. Reese

233 A.D.2d 475, 650 N.Y.S.2d 970, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12647

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

DecidedNovember 25, 1996

StatusPublished

This text of 233 A.D.2d 475 (Corvino v. Reese) 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

Corvino v. Reese, 233 A.D.2d 475, 650 N.Y.S.2d 970, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12647 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Gowan, J.), dated December 4, 1995, which, upon, in effect, granting reargument, inter alia, vacated a previous order of the same court, dated August 7, 1995, dismissing the complaint, and denied the defendant’s motion to dismiss the complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

Contrary to the defendant’s contention, the court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in granting reargument and vacating its prior order, since the plaintiffs complied with the requirements of CPLR 203 (b) (5) by mailing the summons and verified complaint to the Suffolk County Sheriff prior to the expiration of the applicable Statute of Limitations (see, Johnson Matthey Ltd. v Farrell, 141 AD2d 68; see also, Sanford v Garvey, 81 AD2d 748). Mangano, P. J., O’Brien, Pizzuto, Gold-stein and Luciano, 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 defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Gowan, J.), dated December 4, 1995, which, upon, in effect, granting reargument, inter alia, vacated a previous order of the same court, dated August 7, 1995, dismissing the complaint, and denied the defendant’s motion to dismiss the complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

Contrary to the defendant’s contention, the court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in granting reargument and vacating its prior order, since the plaintiffs complied with the requirements of CPLR 203 (b) (5) by mailing the summons and verified complaint to the Suffolk County Sheriff prior to the expiration of the applicable Statute of Limitations (see, Johnson Matthey Ltd. v Farrell, 141 AD2d 68; see also, Sanford v Garvey, 81 AD2d 748). Mangano, P. J., O’Brien, Pizzuto, Gold-stein and Luciano, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

233 A.D.2d 475, 650 N.Y.S.2d 970, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12647, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/corvino-v-reese-nyappdiv-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack