DeCarlo v. All County Transportation

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

DeCarlo v. All County Transportation

259 A.D.2d 589, 684 N.Y.S.2d 916, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2474

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

DecidedMarch 15, 1999

StatusPublished

This text of 259 A.D.2d 589 (DeCarlo v. All County Transportation) 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

DeCarlo v. All County Transportation, 259 A.D.2d 589, 684 N.Y.S.2d 916, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2474 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Huttner, J.), dated March 10, 1998, which denied their motion to restore the action to the trial calendar.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with one bill of costs to the respondents appearing separately and filing separate briefs.

The Supreme Court properly exercised its discretion in denying the plaintiffs’ motion to restore the action to the trial calendar (see, CPLR 3404; Ziobro v Children’s Hosp., 242 AD2d 922; Gonzalez v First Natl. Supermarket, 232 AD2d 609; Jeffs v Janessa, Inc., 226 AD2d 504). Bracken, J. P., Sullivan, Altman and Friedmann, 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, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Huttner, J.), dated March 10, 1998, which denied their motion to restore the action to the trial calendar.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with one bill of costs to the respondents appearing separately and filing separate briefs.

The Supreme Court properly exercised its discretion in denying the plaintiffs’ motion to restore the action to the trial calendar (see, CPLR 3404; Ziobro v Children’s Hosp., 242 AD2d 922; Gonzalez v First Natl. Supermarket, 232 AD2d 609; Jeffs v Janessa, Inc., 226 AD2d 504). Bracken, J. P., Sullivan, Altman and Friedmann, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

259 A.D.2d 589, 684 N.Y.S.2d 916, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2474, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/decarlo-v-all-county-transportation-nyappdiv-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack