DeSimone v. DiMaria

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

DeSimone v. DiMaria

216 A.D.2d 437, 628 N.Y.S.2d 540, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6472

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

DecidedJune 19, 1995

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 216 A.D.2d 437 (DeSimone v. DiMaria) 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

DeSimone v. DiMaria, 216 A.D.2d 437, 628 N.Y.S.2d 540, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6472 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover damages, inter alia, for wrongful death, the defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Dye, J.), dated October [438]*4387, 1994, which denied his motion pursuant to CPLR 3216 to dismiss the complaint for failure to prosecute.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The Supreme Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion by denying the defendant’s motion to dismiss the complaint for failure to prosecute. The 90-day notice pursuant to CPLR 3216 was served prior to the completion of discovery (see, Markarian v Hundert, 204 AD2d 697; Martinisi v Cornwall Hosp., 177 AD2d 549), and the record fails to reveal any significant delay on the part of the plaintiff in prosecuting this action (see, CPLR 3216 [a]). Sullivan, J. P., Miller, Copertino, Joy 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, inter alia, for wrongful death, the defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Dye, J.), dated October [438]*4387, 1994, which denied his motion pursuant to CPLR 3216 to dismiss the complaint for failure to prosecute.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The Supreme Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion by denying the defendant’s motion to dismiss the complaint for failure to prosecute. The 90-day notice pursuant to CPLR 3216 was served prior to the completion of discovery (see, Markarian v Hundert, 204 AD2d 697; Martinisi v Cornwall Hosp., 177 AD2d 549), and the record fails to reveal any significant delay on the part of the plaintiff in prosecuting this action (see, CPLR 3216 [a]). Sullivan, J. P., Miller, Copertino, Joy and Friedmann, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

216 A.D.2d 437, 628 N.Y.S.2d 540, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6472, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/desimone-v-dimaria-nyappdiv-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack