Lobosco v. Katzer

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Lobosco v. Katzer

48 A.D.2d 903, 372 N.Y.S.2d 989, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10170

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

DecidedJune 23, 1975

StatusPublished

This text of 48 A.D.2d 903 (Lobosco v. Katzer) 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

Lobosco v. Katzer, 48 A.D.2d 903, 372 N.Y.S.2d 989, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10170 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1975).

Pincite

Opinion

In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injuries, plaintiff appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated October 22, 1974, as, after denying his motion for reargument as to pretrial proceedings, sua sponte struck out plaintiff’s pleadings and dismissed the action. Order reversed insofar as appealed from, with $20 costs and disbursements, and plaintiff’s pleadings and action reinstated. The pretrial examination shall proceed at the place designated in the order dated July 29, 1974, at a time to be fixed in a written notice of not less than 10 days. In our view, plaintiff’s default, if [904]*904any, in appearing for examination before trial while his motion for reargument was pending, was not so deliberate or contumacious as to justify the drastic action of dismissal of the action. Rabin, Acting P. J., Latham, Cohalan, Brennan and Shapiro, 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, plaintiff appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated October 22, 1974, as, after denying his motion for reargument as to pretrial proceedings, sua sponte struck out plaintiff’s pleadings and dismissed the action. Order reversed insofar as appealed from, with $20 costs and disbursements, and plaintiff’s pleadings and action reinstated. The pretrial examination shall proceed at the place designated in the order dated July 29, 1974, at a time to be fixed in a written notice of not less than 10 days. In our view, plaintiff’s default, if [904]*904any, in appearing for examination before trial while his motion for reargument was pending, was not so deliberate or contumacious as to justify the drastic action of dismissal of the action. Rabin, Acting P. J., Latham, Cohalan, Brennan and Shapiro, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

48 A.D.2d 903, 372 N.Y.S.2d 989, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10170, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lobosco-v-katzer-nyappdiv-1975.