El v. Schertz

33 A.D.3d 585, 821 N.Y.S.2d 465
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided October 3, 2006·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Ruchelsman, J), dated December 7, 2004, which denied her motion to vacate a stipulation of discontinuance dated December 12, 2003, and to restore the action to the trial calendar with respect to the defendant Mark Klutsman.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The plaintiff failed to make a sufficient showing to vacate the stipulation of discontinuance based on unilateral mistake (see Matter of Frutiger, 29 NY2d 143, 150; G&S Clam Bar v Melillo, 302 AD2d 492 [2003]; Karapetyan v Underwood, 287 AD2d 547 [2001]). Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly denied the plaintiffs motion. Adams, J.P, Ritter, Goldstein, Skelos and Dillon, JJ., concur.

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

El v. Schertz, 33 A.D.3d 585, 821 N.Y.S.2d 465 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2006).

33 A.D.3d 585 (El v. Schertz) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Banana Kelly Union HDFC v. Chambers
Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York, 2016
Moshe v. Town of Ramapo
54 A.D.3d 1030 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2008)
Utica Mutual Insurance v. Swim Tech Pool Services Inc.
37 A.D.3d 706 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2007)
Matthews v. Castro
35 A.D.3d 403 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2006)