Guida v. Victory Memorial Hospital

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Guida v. Victory Memorial Hospital

50 A.D.2d 800, 375 N.Y.S.2d 632, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11609

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

DecidedDecember 1, 1975

StatusPublished

This text of 50 A.D.2d 800 (Guida v. Victory Memorial Hospital) 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

Guida v. Victory Memorial Hospital, 50 A.D.2d 800, 375 N.Y.S.2d 632, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11609 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1975).

Pincite

Opinion

— In a medical malpractice action, defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated February 19, 1975, which (1) granted plaintiffs’ motion to vacate the dismissal of the action (a) unconditionally as against defendant Gugliemelli and (b) conditionally against the remaining defendants and (2) restored the case to the trial calendar. Order affirmed, with one bill of $50 costs and disbursements against defendants jointly. Plaintiffs made a sufficient showing of merits and of excusable neglect in the prosecution of the action. Consequently, Trial Term did not abuse its discretion in granting the motion. Gulotta, P. J., Rabin, Hopkins, Martuscello and Cohalan, JJ., concur.

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

— In a medical malpractice action, defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated February 19, 1975, which (1) granted plaintiffs’ motion to vacate the dismissal of the action (a) unconditionally as against defendant Gugliemelli and (b) conditionally against the remaining defendants and (2) restored the case to the trial calendar. Order affirmed, with one bill of $50 costs and disbursements against defendants jointly. Plaintiffs made a sufficient showing of merits and of excusable neglect in the prosecution of the action. Consequently, Trial Term did not abuse its discretion in granting the motion. Gulotta, P. J., Rabin, Hopkins, Martuscello and Cohalan, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

50 A.D.2d 800, 375 N.Y.S.2d 632, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11609, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/guida-v-victory-memorial-hospital-nyappdiv-1975.