Marin Construction Corp. v. 62 Holding Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Marin Construction Corp. v. 62 Holding Corp.

87 A.D.2d 547, 448 N.Y.S.2d 175, 1982 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15785

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

DecidedMarch 18, 1982

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 87 A.D.2d 547 (Marin Construction Corp. v. 62 Holding 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

Marin Construction Corp. v. 62 Holding Corp., 87 A.D.2d 547, 448 N.Y.S.2d 175, 1982 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15785 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1982).

Pincite

Opinion

— Order of the Supreme Court, Bronx County (Kent, J.), entered August 31, 1981, which granted defendant a default judgment on its counterclaims and severed them, setting them down for an inquest, is reversed, to the extent appealed from, without costs, on the law, the facts and in the exercise of discretion, and the motion denied. The court’s decision was specifically based upon a two-day lateness by plaintiff in replying to defendant’s counterclaims. [548]*548In view of the desirability of having cases determined on their merits, such a strict, overly technical application of statutory time periods is misplaced where no prejudice has been demonstrated and where defendant’s acceptance and retention of plaintiff’s reply for approximately 10 months prior to its motion for summary judgment can be deemed to constitute a waiver of its right to complain about the late service. (Nagel v Sonnenberg, 74 AD2d 565; Maunz v Laube, 60 AD2d 970.) Concur —• Murphy, P. J., Sandler, Lupiano, Bloom and Milonas, JJ.

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

— Order of the Supreme Court, Bronx County (Kent, J.), entered August 31, 1981, which granted defendant a default judgment on its counterclaims and severed them, setting them down for an inquest, is reversed, to the extent appealed from, without costs, on the law, the facts and in the exercise of discretion, and the motion denied. The court’s decision was specifically based upon a two-day lateness by plaintiff in replying to defendant’s counterclaims. [548]*548In view of the desirability of having cases determined on their merits, such a strict, overly technical application of statutory time periods is misplaced where no prejudice has been demonstrated and where defendant’s acceptance and retention of plaintiff’s reply for approximately 10 months prior to its motion for summary judgment can be deemed to constitute a waiver of its right to complain about the late service. (Nagel v Sonnenberg, 74 AD2d 565; Maunz v Laube, 60 AD2d 970.) Concur —• Murphy, P. J., Sandler, Lupiano, Bloom and Milonas, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

87 A.D.2d 547, 448 N.Y.S.2d 175, 1982 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15785, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/marin-construction-corp-v-62-holding-corp-nyappdiv-1982.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack