Fronk v. Kam Yeung

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Fronk v. Kam Yeung

286 A.D.2d 972, 730 N.Y.S.2d 766, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9087

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided September 28, 2001·Published

Opinion

—Order unanimously affirmed with costs. Memorandum: Supreme Court properly denied defendant’s motion to dismiss this action as abandoned pursuant to CPLR 3404. As the court properly determined, the record contains no clear indication that the case had ever been “marked ‘off or struck from the calendar or unanswered on a clerk’s calendar call” (CPLR 3404; see, Auerbach v Kaufman, 173 AD2d 229, 230; Trustees of Freeholders & Commonalty of Town of Southampton v Heilner, 143 AD2d 134, 135). (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Genesee County, Fahey, J. — Dismiss Action.) Present — Green, J. P., Hurlbutt, Scudder, Kehoe and Gorski, JJ.

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

—Order unanimously affirmed with costs. Memorandum: Supreme Court properly denied defendant’s motion to dismiss this action as abandoned pursuant to CPLR 3404. As the court properly determined, the record contains no clear indication that the case had ever been “marked ‘off or struck from the calendar or unanswered on a clerk’s calendar call” (CPLR 3404; see, Auerbach v Kaufman, 173 AD2d 229, 230; Trustees of Freeholders & Commonalty of Town of Southampton v Heilner, 143 AD2d 134, 135). (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Genesee County, Fahey, J. — Dismiss Action.) Present — Green, J. P., Hurlbutt, Scudder, Kehoe and Gorski, JJ.

Fronk v. Kam Yeung, 286 A.D.2d 972, 730 N.Y.S.2d 766, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9087 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

286 A.D.2d 972 (Fronk v. Kam Yeung) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related