Krawiec v. Ford Motor Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Krawiec v. Ford Motor Co.

106 A.D.2d 551, 484 N.Y.S.2d 1014, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 20628

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

DecidedDecember 24, 1984

StatusPublished

This text of 106 A.D.2d 551 (Krawiec v. Ford Motor Co.) 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

Krawiec v. Ford Motor Co., 106 A.D.2d 551, 484 N.Y.S.2d 1014, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 20628 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1984).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for breach of warranty, plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Baisley, J.), dated March 21, 1983, which granted the motion of defendants Ford Motor Company and Ford Marketing Corporation, inter alia, to dismiss the complaint and denied plaintiff’s cross motion to, in effect, open his default in moving to restore the action to the calendar.

Order affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The plaintiff has failed to make the requisite showing of facts sufficient to excuse the delay of nearly three years in prosecuting the action and, accordingly, it was a proper exercise of discretion to deny plaintiff’s cross motion to open his default in moving to restore the action to the calendar. The action was properly dismissed as abandoned pursuant to CPLR 3404. Lazer, J. P., Mangano, Bracken and Niehoff, 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 breach of warranty, plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Baisley, J.), dated March 21, 1983, which granted the motion of defendants Ford Motor Company and Ford Marketing Corporation, inter alia, to dismiss the complaint and denied plaintiff’s cross motion to, in effect, open his default in moving to restore the action to the calendar.

Order affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The plaintiff has failed to make the requisite showing of facts sufficient to excuse the delay of nearly three years in prosecuting the action and, accordingly, it was a proper exercise of discretion to deny plaintiff’s cross motion to open his default in moving to restore the action to the calendar. The action was properly dismissed as abandoned pursuant to CPLR 3404. Lazer, J. P., Mangano, Bracken and Niehoff, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

106 A.D.2d 551, 484 N.Y.S.2d 1014, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 20628, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/krawiec-v-ford-motor-co-nyappdiv-1984.