Reineke v. Lesavoy Foundation

18 A.D.2d 790, 236 N.Y.S.2d 352, 1963 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4615

Opinion

Order, entered on June 5, 1962, unanimously modified on the law and in the exercise of discretion to deny the motion unconditionally, and, as so modified, affirmed, without costs, arid the motion to preclude denied, without costs. The motion was not made ’within the prescribed period of 10 days after service of the allegedly inadequate supplemental bill, and there is no showing of “special circumstances”i tending to excuse the defendants’ failure to timely move for the relief now sought. (Rules Civ. Prae., rule 115, subd. [d]; see, also, Curtis v. Curtis, 178 Misc. 213, affd. 265 App. Div. 998; Montagna v. Profeta, 17 Misc 2d 59.) Concur — Botein, P. J., Breitel, Valente, Eager and Steuer, JJ. j

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

Reineke v. Lesavoy Foundation, 18 A.D.2d 790, 236 N.Y.S.2d 352, 1963 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4615 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1963).

18 A.D.2d 790 (Reineke v. Lesavoy Foundation) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Curtis v. Curtis
265 A.D. 998 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1943)
Curtis v. Curtis
178 Misc. 213 (New York Supreme Court, 1942)
Montagna v. Profeta
17 Misc. 2d 59 (New York Supreme Court, 1959)