Gilmore v. New York City Housing Authority

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Gilmore v. New York City Housing Authority

191 A.D.2d 412, 596 N.Y.S.2d 692

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

DecidedMarch 1, 1993

StatusPublished

This text of 191 A.D.2d 412 (Gilmore v. New York City Housing Authority) 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

Gilmore v. New York City Housing Authority, 191 A.D.2d 412, 596 N.Y.S.2d 692 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries and wrongful death, the plaintiff appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Hurowitz, J.), dated January 23,1991, as denied his cross motion to strike the answer.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The Supreme Court’s denial of the plaintiffs cross motion to strike the answer constituted a proper exercise of discretion (see, Pietrowski v City of New York, 166 AD2d 423; Dauria v City of New York, 127 AD2d 459). Accordingly, the parties should proceed with discovery in order to facilitate the resolution of the case. Bracken, J. P., Lawrence, Miller, Copertino and Santucci, JJ., concur.

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

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries and wrongful death, the plaintiff appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Hurowitz, J.), dated January 23,1991, as denied his cross motion to strike the answer.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The Supreme Court’s denial of the plaintiffs cross motion to strike the answer constituted a proper exercise of discretion (see, Pietrowski v City of New York, 166 AD2d 423; Dauria v City of New York, 127 AD2d 459). Accordingly, the parties should proceed with discovery in order to facilitate the resolution of the case. Bracken, J. P., Lawrence, Miller, Copertino and Santucci, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

191 A.D.2d 412, 596 N.Y.S.2d 692, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gilmore-v-new-york-city-housing-authority-nyappdiv-1993.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack