Pena v. City of New York

192 A.D.2d 493, 597 N.Y.S.2d 299, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4418
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided April 29, 1993·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County [494] (Leland DeGrasse, J.), entered July 2, 1991, which granted plaintiffs motion to deem abandoned defendant-appellant’s prior, successful motion for summary judgment, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Where defendant’s only excuse for serving its proposed order more than three months after the filing of the court’s decision to dismiss was inadvertence or oversight, and the decision to dismiss was based on plaintiffs own earlier failure to timely move for a default judgment, it was not an abuse of discretion to deem defendant’s motion abandoned pursuant to 22 NYCRR 202.48 (see, Feldman v New York City Tr. Auth., 171 AD2d 473, 474). Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Carro, Milonas, Kupferman and Ross, JJ.

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

Pena v. City of New York, 192 A.D.2d 493, 597 N.Y.S.2d 299, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4418 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1993).

192 A.D.2d 493 (Pena v. City of New York) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

White v. White
226 A.D.2d 525 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1996)
BAJE Realty Corp. v. Cutler
222 A.D.2d 242 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1995)
Russo v. City of New York
206 A.D.2d 355 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1994)