Kraljic v. Steinway Transit Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Kraljic v. Steinway Transit Corp.

43 A.D.2d 982, 352 N.Y.S.2d 509, 1974 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5634

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

DecidedFebruary 25, 1974

StatusPublished

This text of 43 A.D.2d 982 (Kraljic v. Steinway Transit Corp.) 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

Kraljic v. Steinway Transit Corp., 43 A.D.2d 982, 352 N.Y.S.2d 509, 1974 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5634 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1974).

Pincite

Opinion

In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injuries, defendant Smyth appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated June 6, 1973, which conditionally denied his motion to dismiss the complaint for lack of prosecution, under CPLR 3216, the condition being that plaintiff place the case on the calendar within a stated time. Order modified by adding thereto a provision that the denial of the motion is on the further condition that plain[983]*983tiff’s attorney personally pay appellant $150 costs. Said $150 costs must be paid within 20 days after entry of the order to be made hereon. As so modified, order affirmed, with $20 costs to appellant. While we do' not consider the circumstances herein sufficient to warrant dismissal of the complaint, there was an inordinate delay attributable to plaintiff’s attorney for which plaintiff should not be penalized, but which warrants imposing costs against counsel. Gulotta, P. J., Hopkins, Latham and Brennan, 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 personal injuries, defendant Smyth appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated June 6, 1973, which conditionally denied his motion to dismiss the complaint for lack of prosecution, under CPLR 3216, the condition being that plaintiff place the case on the calendar within a stated time. Order modified by adding thereto a provision that the denial of the motion is on the further condition that plain[983]*983tiff’s attorney personally pay appellant $150 costs. Said $150 costs must be paid within 20 days after entry of the order to be made hereon. As so modified, order affirmed, with $20 costs to appellant. While we do' not consider the circumstances herein sufficient to warrant dismissal of the complaint, there was an inordinate delay attributable to plaintiff’s attorney for which plaintiff should not be penalized, but which warrants imposing costs against counsel. Gulotta, P. J., Hopkins, Latham and Brennan, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

43 A.D.2d 982, 352 N.Y.S.2d 509, 1974 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5634, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kraljic-v-steinway-transit-corp-nyappdiv-1974.