Desai v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Desai v. City of New York

81 A.D.2d 797, 439 N.Y.S.2d 124, 1981 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11450

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

DecidedMay 21, 1981

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 81 A.D.2d 797 (Desai v. City of New York) 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

Desai v. City of New York, 81 A.D.2d 797, 439 N.Y.S.2d 124, 1981 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11450 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1981).

Pincite

Opinion

— Order, Supreme Court, New York County, entered December 3, 1980, reversed, on the law, the motion to vacate a default granted, the inquest taken on default vacated, the judgment entered thereon vacated and set aside, and the case directed to be set down for trial anew without delay, without costs. It is quite understandable that declaration of an emergency in the court system, requiring strenuous efforts to clear up calendars, requires expedited procedures, but that provides no basis for disregarding the clear rule of calendar practice set out in New York and Bronx County Supreme Court Rules as subdivision (e) of rule 660.5 (22 NYCRR 660.5 [e]), appertaining to actual engagement of counsel. There was no reason to believe the situation to be other than as represented by defendant’s attorney: that he was actually on trial, having selected a jury in a case about to begin, that there was no attorney available to replace him, and that his unavailability would last no longer than the case requiring his attention. There was not the slightest indication of bad faith or attempt at undue delay, nor any demonstration of prejudice to plaintiff. In short, there was no basis for denial of “ready subject.” Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Markewich, Bloom and Fein, JJ.

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

— Order, Supreme Court, New York County, entered December 3, 1980, reversed, on the law, the motion to vacate a default granted, the inquest taken on default vacated, the judgment entered thereon vacated and set aside, and the case directed to be set down for trial anew without delay, without costs. It is quite understandable that declaration of an emergency in the court system, requiring strenuous efforts to clear up calendars, requires expedited procedures, but that provides no basis for disregarding the clear rule of calendar practice set out in New York and Bronx County Supreme Court Rules as subdivision (e) of rule 660.5 (22 NYCRR 660.5 [e]), appertaining to actual engagement of counsel. There was no reason to believe the situation to be other than as represented by defendant’s attorney: that he was actually on trial, having selected a jury in a case about to begin, that there was no attorney available to replace him, and that his unavailability would last no longer than the case requiring his attention. There was not the slightest indication of bad faith or attempt at undue delay, nor any demonstration of prejudice to plaintiff. In short, there was no basis for denial of “ready subject.” Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Markewich, Bloom and Fein, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

81 A.D.2d 797, 439 N.Y.S.2d 124, 1981 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11450, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/desai-v-city-of-new-york-nyappdiv-1981.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack