Harris v. Morrison
49 A.D.3d 276, 851 N.Y.2d 871
Opinion
Plaintiff showed “sufficient cause . . . why the complaint should not be dismissed” (CPLR 3215 [c]). Acceptance of the excuse offered for the relatively short delay was, under the circumstances, a proper exercise of judicial discretion (see Pappoe v Custodio, 156 AD2d 211 [1989]). Concur-Nardelli, J.P., Williams, Sweeny and Catterson, JJ.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Harris v. Morrison, 49 A.D.3d 276, 851 N.Y.2d 871 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2008).
49 A.D.3d 276 (Harris v. Morrison) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Pappoe v. Custodio
156 A.D.2d 211 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1989)