Martel v. Blankli Realty Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Martel v. Blankli Realty Corp.

37 A.D.2d 769, 324 N.Y.S.2d 559, 1971 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3402

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

DecidedSeptember 28, 1971

StatusPublished

This text of 37 A.D.2d 769 (Martel v. Blankli Realty 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

Martel v. Blankli Realty Corp., 37 A.D.2d 769, 324 N.Y.S.2d 559, 1971 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3402 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1971).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County, entered on July 8, 1970, dismissing the complaint, unanimously reversed, on the law and the facts, without costs and without disbursements, and the action is remanded for trial. The order of the itrial court in granting defendant’s application to amend the answer was proper in the circumstances. However, plaintiff should have been granted a continuance of the trial to bring in other witnesses to meet the issues in the amended pleading. While plaintiff’s counsel was not candid with the court and defense counsel initially, the court in its 'discretion should have granted the continuance. Concur — MeGivem, J. F., Markewich, Nunez, Kupferman and Murphy, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County, entered on July 8, 1970, dismissing the complaint, unanimously reversed, on the law and the facts, without costs and without disbursements, and the action is remanded for trial. The order of the itrial court in granting defendant’s application to amend the answer was proper in the circumstances. However, plaintiff should have been granted a continuance of the trial to bring in other witnesses to meet the issues in the amended pleading. While plaintiff’s counsel was not candid with the court and defense counsel initially, the court in its 'discretion should have granted the continuance. Concur — MeGivem, J. F., Markewich, Nunez, Kupferman and Murphy, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

37 A.D.2d 769, 324 N.Y.S.2d 559, 1971 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3402, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/martel-v-blankli-realty-corp-nyappdiv-1971.