Donannjim Corp. v. State

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Donannjim Corp. v. State

72 A.D.2d 869, 421 N.Y.S.2d 738, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14155

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided November 16, 1979·Published

Opinion

Motion by claimant-appellant for permission to prosecute appeal beyond the one-year period specified by 22 NYCRR 800.12. Motion denied, without costs, and appeal dismissed. The judgment of the Court of Claims is dated February 20, 1976. Pursuant to the rule, claimant-appellant’s appeal was deemed abandoned as of July 1, 1977 (see Hobs v State of New York, 53 AD2d 998). The allegation by counsel that his law firm was disrupted for two years by a pending dissolution is insufficient to excuse the delay which in this case is inordinate. Mahoney, P. J., Sweeney, Kane, Main and Herlihy, JJ., concur.

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

Motion by claimant-appellant for permission to prosecute appeal beyond the one-year period specified by 22 NYCRR 800.12. Motion denied, without costs, and appeal dismissed. The judgment of the Court of Claims is dated February 20, 1976. Pursuant to the rule, claimant-appellant’s appeal was deemed abandoned as of July 1, 1977 (see Hobs v State of New York, 53 AD2d 998). The allegation by counsel that his law firm was disrupted for two years by a pending dissolution is insufficient to excuse the delay which in this case is inordinate. Mahoney, P. J., Sweeney, Kane, Main and Herlihy, JJ., concur.

Donannjim Corp. v. State, 72 A.D.2d 869, 421 N.Y.S.2d 738, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14155 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1979).

Pincite

72 A.D.2d 869 (Donannjim Corp. v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related