Dmytrenko v. Atkins

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Dmytrenko v. Atkins

39 A.D.2d 833, 333 N.Y.S.2d 93, 1972 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4514

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

DecidedMay 25, 1972

StatusPublished

This text of 39 A.D.2d 833 (Dmytrenko v. Atkins) 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

Dmytrenko v. Atkins, 39 A.D.2d 833, 333 N.Y.S.2d 93, 1972 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4514 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1972).

Pincite

Opinion

Order unanimously reversed, without costs, and motion denied. Memorandum: This action was commenced on August 14, 1965 to recover damages for injuries sustained on January 7, 1965. The case was placed on the general docket on February 5, 1968 and was deemed abandoned on February 5, 1969 (CPLR 3404). On August 26, 1971 plaintiff moved to restore the case to the calendar on the affidavit of his attorney showing that the case was removed from the Trial Calendar in February, 1968 so that a declaratory judgment action by defendant Rigby’s insurance company could be tried first; that plaintiff’s first attorney Namisniak died on October 17, 1968; that plaintiff retained a second attorney Rybarczyk and affiant was substituted as attorney on March 18, 1971 when Rybarczyk was appointed Cayuga County Judge. There is no affidavit by plaintiff or by his former attorney Rybarczyk. Plaintiff failed to show that anything had been done on his behalf in the prosecution of his action from February, 1968 until August 26, 1971 and also failed to state meritorious reasons for its restoration to the calendar as required by section 1024.13 of the Supreme Court (4th Dept.) Rules (22 NYCRR 1024.13 [a]). The granting of the order was an improvident exercise of discretion. (Appeals from order of Cayuga Special Term restoring action to Trial Calendar.) Present — Del Yecchio, J. P., Witmer, Moule, Cardamone and Henry, JJ.

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

Order unanimously reversed, without costs, and motion denied. Memorandum: This action was commenced on August 14, 1965 to recover damages for injuries sustained on January 7, 1965. The case was placed on the general docket on February 5, 1968 and was deemed abandoned on February 5, 1969 (CPLR 3404). On August 26, 1971 plaintiff moved to restore the case to the calendar on the affidavit of his attorney showing that the case was removed from the Trial Calendar in February, 1968 so that a declaratory judgment action by defendant Rigby’s insurance company could be tried first; that plaintiff’s first attorney Namisniak died on October 17, 1968; that plaintiff retained a second attorney Rybarczyk and affiant was substituted as attorney on March 18, 1971 when Rybarczyk was appointed Cayuga County Judge. There is no affidavit by plaintiff or by his former attorney Rybarczyk. Plaintiff failed to show that anything had been done on his behalf in the prosecution of his action from February, 1968 until August 26, 1971 and also failed to state meritorious reasons for its restoration to the calendar as required by section 1024.13 of the Supreme Court (4th Dept.) Rules (22 NYCRR 1024.13 [a]). The granting of the order was an improvident exercise of discretion. (Appeals from order of Cayuga Special Term restoring action to Trial Calendar.) Present — Del Yecchio, J. P., Witmer, Moule, Cardamone and Henry, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

39 A.D.2d 833, 333 N.Y.S.2d 93, 1972 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4514, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dmytrenko-v-atkins-nyappdiv-1972.