Francisco v. Walgreen Eastern Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Francisco v. Walgreen Eastern Co.

25 A.D.2d 681, 269 N.Y.S.2d 170, 1966 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4671

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

DecidedMarch 28, 1966

StatusPublished

This text of 25 A.D.2d 681 (Francisco v. Walgreen Eastern Co.) 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

Francisco v. Walgreen Eastern Co., 25 A.D.2d 681, 269 N.Y.S.2d 170, 1966 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4671 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1966).

Pincite

Opinion

In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injury, defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, entered August 18, 1965, which denied its motion to dismiss the action, pursuant to CPLR 3012 (subd. [.b]), for failure to serve a complaint. Order reversed, without costs; defendant’s motion granted; and action dismissed, without costs. The order denied the motion without prejudice to renewal upon plaintiff’s failure to comply with a demand served pursuant to CPLR 3216. Rule 3216 as amended (L. 1964, ch. 974) has no application to a motion made under CPLR 3012 (subd. [b]) to dismiss for failure to serve a complaint (Waldron v. Ward, 24 A D 2d 470). The only reason offered by plaintiff for his failure to serve the complaint for 29 months following the service of the summons was that his attorney had misplaced the file of the action. Such excuse is inadequate to justify the delay (Bradley v. City of New York, 24 A D 2d 490).

Beldoek, P. J., Ughetta, Christ, Brennan and Hopkins, JJ., concur.

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

In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injury, defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, entered August 18, 1965, which denied its motion to dismiss the action, pursuant to CPLR 3012 (subd. [.b]), for failure to serve a complaint. Order reversed, without costs; defendant’s motion granted; and action dismissed, without costs. The order denied the motion without prejudice to renewal upon plaintiff’s failure to comply with a demand served pursuant to CPLR 3216. Rule 3216 as amended (L. 1964, ch. 974) has no application to a motion made under CPLR 3012 (subd. [b]) to dismiss for failure to serve a complaint (Waldron v. Ward, 24 A D 2d 470). The only reason offered by plaintiff for his failure to serve the complaint for 29 months following the service of the summons was that his attorney had misplaced the file of the action. Such excuse is inadequate to justify the delay (Bradley v. City of New York, 24 A D 2d 490).

Beldoek, P. J., Ughetta, Christ, Brennan and Hopkins, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

25 A.D.2d 681, 269 N.Y.S.2d 170, 1966 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4671, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/francisco-v-walgreen-eastern-co-nyappdiv-1966.