Estate of Grant v. Guidotti

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Estate of Grant v. Guidotti

72 A.D.2d 787, 421 N.Y.S.2d 832, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14031

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

DecidedNovember 19, 1979

StatusPublished

This text of 72 A.D.2d 787 (Estate of Grant v. Guidotti) 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

Estate of Grant v. Guidotti, 72 A.D.2d 787, 421 N.Y.S.2d 832, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14031 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1979).

Pincite

Opinion

In a medical malpractice action, defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, entered December 15, 1978, which vacated plaintiffs’ default and granted them leave to serve a complaint. Order affirmed, with $50 costs and disbursements. Plaintiffs’ time to serve a complaint is extended until 20 days after service upon them of a copy of the order to be made hereon, together with notice of entry thereof. We find appellant’s "record on appeal” insufficient and inadequate. If it were complete, respondents would have had no reason to file their appendix. In the interest of justice, however, rather than dismiss the appeal, we consider the "record on appeal” to be an appendix and have treated the entire appeal as being presented on the appendix method. In our opinion, on all of the proof submitted, Special Term did not abuse its discretion. Titone, J. P., O’Connor, Gulotta and Margett, JJ., concur.

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

In a medical malpractice action, defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, entered December 15, 1978, which vacated plaintiffs’ default and granted them leave to serve a complaint. Order affirmed, with $50 costs and disbursements. Plaintiffs’ time to serve a complaint is extended until 20 days after service upon them of a copy of the order to be made hereon, together with notice of entry thereof. We find appellant’s "record on appeal” insufficient and inadequate. If it were complete, respondents would have had no reason to file their appendix. In the interest of justice, however, rather than dismiss the appeal, we consider the "record on appeal” to be an appendix and have treated the entire appeal as being presented on the appendix method. In our opinion, on all of the proof submitted, Special Term did not abuse its discretion. Titone, J. P., O’Connor, Gulotta and Margett, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

72 A.D.2d 787, 421 N.Y.S.2d 832, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14031, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/estate-of-grant-v-guidotti-nyappdiv-1979.