Di Russo v. Kravitz
This text of 238 N.E.2d 329 (Di Russo v. Kravitz) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Orders affirmed, with costs, in the following memorandum: To permit plaintiff to recover after he deliberately and willfully submitted a false affidavit to mislead the court would place a premium on such reprehensible and illegal conduct.
Plaintiff’s false affidavit was used to defeat defendant’s right to a dismissal of the action. Such grievous misconduct offends against fundamental concepts of the true administration of justice.
Defendant’s motion for renewal of the motion to dismiss was promptly made upon the discovery of the fraud during trial and before the case was concluded and a final determination rendered.
Under these circumstances, the Appellate Division did not abuse its discretion in granting said motion nunc pro tunc.
Concur: Chief Judge Fuld and Judges Burke, Scileppi, Bergan and Jasen. Judges Keating and Breitel dissent and vote to reverse and grant a new trial on the ground that, as a matter of law, plaintiff should not be denied his $75,000 judgment because of his admittedly reprehensible conduct in filing a false affidavit on an earlier practice motion (cf. Peters v. Berkeley, 219 App. Div. 261, 263-264).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
238 N.E.2d 329, 21 N.Y.2d 1008, 290 N.Y.S.2d 928, 1968 N.Y. LEXIS 1421, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/di-russo-v-kravitz-ny-1968.