Hardware Mutual Casualty Co. v. Rosenberg

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Hardware Mutual Casualty Co. v. Rosenberg

3 A.D.2d 988, 163 N.Y.S.2d 88, 1957 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5237

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided June 4, 1957·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

No excuse has been [989]*989offered for the delay and the belated filing of a note of issue some 14 months after joinder of issue, and after the motion to dismiss for failure to prosecute was made does not excuse plaintiff’s neglect. Order unanimously reversed, with $20 costs and disbursements to the appellant, the motion granted and the clerk is directed to enter judgment in favor of the defendant Edna Goldfein Rosenberg, dismissing the complaint for lack of prosecution, with costs. Concur— Botein, J. P., Rabin, McNally and Bergan, JJ.

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

No excuse has been [989]*989offered for the delay and the belated filing of a note of issue some 14 months after joinder of issue, and after the motion to dismiss for failure to prosecute was made does not excuse plaintiff’s neglect. Order unanimously reversed, with $20 costs and disbursements to the appellant, the motion granted and the clerk is directed to enter judgment in favor of the defendant Edna Goldfein Rosenberg, dismissing the complaint for lack of prosecution, with costs. Concur— Botein, J. P., Rabin, McNally and Bergan, JJ.

Hardware Mutual Casualty Co. v. Rosenberg, 3 A.D.2d 988, 163 N.Y.S.2d 88, 1957 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5237 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1957).

Pincite

3 A.D.2d 988 (Hardware Mutual Casualty Co. v. Rosenberg) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related