Heimer v. Johnson, Drake & Piper, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Heimer v. Johnson, Drake & Piper, Inc.

26 A.D.2d 547, 270 N.Y.S.2d 870, 1966 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4052

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

DecidedJune 6, 1966

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 26 A.D.2d 547 (Heimer v. Johnson, Drake & Piper, Inc.) 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

Heimer v. Johnson, Drake & Piper, Inc., 26 A.D.2d 547, 270 N.Y.S.2d 870, 1966 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4052 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1966).

Pincite

Opinion

In a negligence action to recover damages for injury to property, defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, entered March 16, 1966, which (1) granted a motion to amend the complaint so as to substitute as a plaintiff the executor of the decedent’s estate of Jennie Heimer, in place of the latter, and (2) denied defendants’ cross motion to dismiss the complaint pursuant to statute (CPLR 3211, subd. [a], pars. 3, 5). Order affirmed, without costs. The summons and complaint were served four months after the death of plaintiff Jennie Heimer and three months after the appointment of the executor. In our opinion, the substitution of the executor for the deceased plaintiff was properly permitted as the correction of an irregularity under CPLR 2001 (Rosenberg v. Caban, 16 N Y 2d 905). Defendants’ defenses with regard to the interest of .coplaintiff John Coppola and the alleged absence of necessary parties have not been waived under CPLR 3211 (subd. [e]). However, under the circumstances, defendants should be left to their remedies in the trial court. Beldock, P. J., Christ, Hill, Rabin and Benjamin, JJ., concur.

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

In a negligence action to recover damages for injury to property, defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, entered March 16, 1966, which (1) granted a motion to amend the complaint so as to substitute as a plaintiff the executor of the decedent’s estate of Jennie Heimer, in place of the latter, and (2) denied defendants’ cross motion to dismiss the complaint pursuant to statute (CPLR 3211, subd. [a], pars. 3, 5). Order affirmed, without costs. The summons and complaint were served four months after the death of plaintiff Jennie Heimer and three months after the appointment of the executor. In our opinion, the substitution of the executor for the deceased plaintiff was properly permitted as the correction of an irregularity under CPLR 2001 (Rosenberg v. Caban, 16 N Y 2d 905). Defendants’ defenses with regard to the interest of .coplaintiff John Coppola and the alleged absence of necessary parties have not been waived under CPLR 3211 (subd. [e]). However, under the circumstances, defendants should be left to their remedies in the trial court. Beldock, P. J., Christ, Hill, Rabin and Benjamin, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

26 A.D.2d 547, 270 N.Y.S.2d 870, 1966 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4052, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/heimer-v-johnson-drake-piper-inc-nyappdiv-1966.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack