Kleinfeld v. New York City Housing Authority

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Kleinfeld v. New York City Housing Authority

19 A.D.2d 628, 241 N.Y.S.2d 392, 1963 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3636

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

DecidedJune 10, 1963

StatusPublished

This text of 19 A.D.2d 628 (Kleinfeld v. New York City Housing Authority) 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

Kleinfeld v. New York City Housing Authority, 19 A.D.2d 628, 241 N.Y.S.2d 392, 1963 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3636 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1963).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for personal injury, medical expenses and loss of services, defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, entered September 18, 1962, which denied its motion to dismiss the complaint for lack of prosecution (Civ. Prac. Act, § 181; [629]*629Rules Oiv. Brae., rule 156). Order reversed, without costs, motion granted, and complaint dismissed. In opposition to the motion the plaintiffs failed: (a) to present facts showing any reasonable excuse for their delay of some 20 months after joinder of issue in bringing the cause on for trial, or (b) to make any showing of merits. The motion, therefore, should have been granted in the exercise of discretion, even though plaintiffs served and filed a note of issue after the motion to dismiss had been made (cf. Cooper v. United Veterans Mut. Housing Go., 18 A D 2d 937; Topp v. Casco Prods. Corp., 8 A D 2d 727). Ughetta, Acting P. J., Christ, Brennan, Hill and Rabin, JJ., concur.

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

In an action to recover damages for personal injury, medical expenses and loss of services, defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, entered September 18, 1962, which denied its motion to dismiss the complaint for lack of prosecution (Civ. Prac. Act, § 181; [629]*629Rules Oiv. Brae., rule 156). Order reversed, without costs, motion granted, and complaint dismissed. In opposition to the motion the plaintiffs failed: (a) to present facts showing any reasonable excuse for their delay of some 20 months after joinder of issue in bringing the cause on for trial, or (b) to make any showing of merits. The motion, therefore, should have been granted in the exercise of discretion, even though plaintiffs served and filed a note of issue after the motion to dismiss had been made (cf. Cooper v. United Veterans Mut. Housing Go., 18 A D 2d 937; Topp v. Casco Prods. Corp., 8 A D 2d 727). Ughetta, Acting P. J., Christ, Brennan, Hill and Rabin, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

19 A.D.2d 628, 241 N.Y.S.2d 392, 1963 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3636, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kleinfeld-v-new-york-city-housing-authority-nyappdiv-1963.