Friedman v. Fortgang

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Friedman v. Fortgang

21 A.D.2d 779, 250 N.Y.S.2d 862, 1964 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3477

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

DecidedJune 23, 1964

StatusPublished

This text of 21 A.D.2d 779 (Friedman v. Fortgang) 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

Friedman v. Fortgang, 21 A.D.2d 779, 250 N.Y.S.2d 862, 1964 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3477 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1964).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, entered on March 31, 1964, denying the motion of defendants to dismiss the complaint for failure to prosecute, unanimously affirmed, without costs. In this September, 1961 action for personal injuries incurred in July, 1959, the affidavits of merits submitted by the plaintiffs set forth in especially satisfactory detail evidentiary facts which, if true and proven, establish a strong meritorious ease. In view of these affidavits Special Term’s exercise of discretion in accepting the rather weak excuses for the delay should not be disturbed (see Sortino v. Fisher, 20 A D 2d 25, 32). Concur — Breitel, J. P., Rabin, Valente, Stevens and Staley, JJ.

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

Order, entered on March 31, 1964, denying the motion of defendants to dismiss the complaint for failure to prosecute, unanimously affirmed, without costs. In this September, 1961 action for personal injuries incurred in July, 1959, the affidavits of merits submitted by the plaintiffs set forth in especially satisfactory detail evidentiary facts which, if true and proven, establish a strong meritorious ease. In view of these affidavits Special Term’s exercise of discretion in accepting the rather weak excuses for the delay should not be disturbed (see Sortino v. Fisher, 20 A D 2d 25, 32). Concur — Breitel, J. P., Rabin, Valente, Stevens and Staley, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

21 A.D.2d 779, 250 N.Y.S.2d 862, 1964 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3477, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/friedman-v-fortgang-nyappdiv-1964.