Gruber v. Grand Boulevard & Concourse Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Gruber v. Grand Boulevard & Concourse Co.

17 A.D.2d 802, 1962 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7538

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

DecidedOctober 23, 1962

StatusPublished

This text of 17 A.D.2d 802 (Gruber v. Grand Boulevard & Concourse 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

Gruber v. Grand Boulevard & Concourse Co., 17 A.D.2d 802, 1962 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7538 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1962).

Pincite

Opinion

Order entered January 8, 1962, granting plaintiff’s motion to reargue and upon such reargument denying defendant’s motion to dismiss the action for failure to prosecute, unanimously modified, on the law, the facts, and in the exercise of discretion, with $20 costs and disbursements to appellant, to the extent of adhering to the original decision which had granted the motion to dismiss. The purported affidavits of merits submitted on plaintiff’s behalf do not satisfactorily [803]*803allege facts indicating a meritorious cause of action. This failure is emphasized by the circumstance that upon later reargument defendant urged the absence of an adequate showing of merit upon the first motion to dismiss for lack of prosecution, and nevertheless no further facts were set forth. Concur — Botein, P. J., Breitel, Yalente, McNally and Eager, JJ.

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

Order entered January 8, 1962, granting plaintiff’s motion to reargue and upon such reargument denying defendant’s motion to dismiss the action for failure to prosecute, unanimously modified, on the law, the facts, and in the exercise of discretion, with $20 costs and disbursements to appellant, to the extent of adhering to the original decision which had granted the motion to dismiss. The purported affidavits of merits submitted on plaintiff’s behalf do not satisfactorily [803]*803allege facts indicating a meritorious cause of action. This failure is emphasized by the circumstance that upon later reargument defendant urged the absence of an adequate showing of merit upon the first motion to dismiss for lack of prosecution, and nevertheless no further facts were set forth. Concur — Botein, P. J., Breitel, Yalente, McNally and Eager, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

17 A.D.2d 802, 1962 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7538, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gruber-v-grand-boulevard-concourse-co-nyappdiv-1962.