Levy v. Gunzel

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Levy v. Gunzel

220 A.D.2d 724, 633 N.Y.S.2d 993, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10633

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

DecidedOctober 30, 1995

StatusPublished

This text of 220 A.D.2d 724 (Levy v. Gunzel) 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

Levy v. Gunzel, 220 A.D.2d 724, 633 N.Y.S.2d 993, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10633 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Milano, J.), dated June 23, 1994, which denied their motion to vacate an order of the same court (Lerner, J.), dated January 14, 1994, granting the defendant’s motion to dismiss the complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

In an order dated January 14, 1994, the Supreme Court granted the defendant’s motion to dismiss the complaint without opposition. In an order dated June 23, 1994, the Supreme Court denied the plaintiffs’ motion to vacate the order dated January 14, 1994, finding that the proffered excuse of law office failure was insufficient. We discern no improvident exercise of discretion in the Supreme Court’s rejection of this excuse (see, Putney v Pearlman, 203 AD2d 333; Gass v Gass, 101 AD2d 849). Balletta, J. P., Rosenblatt, Pizzuto, Joy and Altman, 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 injuries, the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Milano, J.), dated June 23, 1994, which denied their motion to vacate an order of the same court (Lerner, J.), dated January 14, 1994, granting the defendant’s motion to dismiss the complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

In an order dated January 14, 1994, the Supreme Court granted the defendant’s motion to dismiss the complaint without opposition. In an order dated June 23, 1994, the Supreme Court denied the plaintiffs’ motion to vacate the order dated January 14, 1994, finding that the proffered excuse of law office failure was insufficient. We discern no improvident exercise of discretion in the Supreme Court’s rejection of this excuse (see, Putney v Pearlman, 203 AD2d 333; Gass v Gass, 101 AD2d 849). Balletta, J. P., Rosenblatt, Pizzuto, Joy and Altman, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

220 A.D.2d 724, 633 N.Y.S.2d 993, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10633, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/levy-v-gunzel-nyappdiv-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack