Escobar v. Seatrain Lines, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Escobar v. Seatrain Lines, Inc.

94 A.D.2d 658, 462 N.Y.S.2d 606, 1983 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 18063

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

DecidedMay 12, 1983

StatusPublished

This text of 94 A.D.2d 658 (Escobar v. Seatrain Lines, Inc.) 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

Escobar v. Seatrain Lines, Inc., 94 A.D.2d 658, 462 N.Y.S.2d 606, 1983 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 18063 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1983).

Pincite

Opinion

— Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Greenfield, J.), entered October 15, 1982, which granted reargument and, upon reargument, vacated a prior order, entered January 26, 1978, and denied the motion to dismiss for forum non conveniens, unanimously affirmed, with costs and disbursements. We find no abuse of discretion and affirm the denial of the motion to dismiss on the ground of forum non conveniens. As conceded by Special Term there was extensive delay between the time of submission and decision. Neither the record nor inquiries on argument provides an explanation. Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Ross, Fein, Milonas and Kassal, JJ.

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

— Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Greenfield, J.), entered October 15, 1982, which granted reargument and, upon reargument, vacated a prior order, entered January 26, 1978, and denied the motion to dismiss for forum non conveniens, unanimously affirmed, with costs and disbursements. We find no abuse of discretion and affirm the denial of the motion to dismiss on the ground of forum non conveniens. As conceded by Special Term there was extensive delay between the time of submission and decision. Neither the record nor inquiries on argument provides an explanation. Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Ross, Fein, Milonas and Kassal, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

94 A.D.2d 658, 462 N.Y.S.2d 606, 1983 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 18063, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/escobar-v-seatrain-lines-inc-nyappdiv-1983.