Riccobono v. Italian Line

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Riccobono v. Italian Line

21 A.D.2d 781, 250 N.Y.S.2d 974, 1964 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3438

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

DecidedJune 25, 1964

StatusPublished

This text of 21 A.D.2d 781 (Riccobono v. Italian Line) 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

Riccobono v. Italian Line, 21 A.D.2d 781, 250 N.Y.S.2d 974, 1964 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3438 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1964).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, entered on March 26, 1964, denying the motion of defendant-appellant to dismiss the action for failure to timely serve a complaint pursuant to CPLR 3012 and to dismiss the complaint for failure to prosecute pursuant to CPLR 3216 and granting the cross motion of plaintiffs-respondents to compel defendant-appellant to accept the complaint, unanimously reversed, on the law, the facts, and in the exercise of discretion, with $20 costs and disbursements to appellant, the cross motion of plaintiffs-respondents denied and the motion of defendant-appellant granted, with $10 costs. In this 1961 action for malpractice of a ship’s physician in 1960, plaintiff fails to justify sufficiently the failure to serve a complaint after [782]*782the stipulation extending time to do so expired on September 17, 1962 (see Sortino v. Fisher, 20 A D 2d 25). Concur — Breitel, J. P., Rabin, Valente, Stevens and Staley, JJ.

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

Order, entered on March 26, 1964, denying the motion of defendant-appellant to dismiss the action for failure to timely serve a complaint pursuant to CPLR 3012 and to dismiss the complaint for failure to prosecute pursuant to CPLR 3216 and granting the cross motion of plaintiffs-respondents to compel defendant-appellant to accept the complaint, unanimously reversed, on the law, the facts, and in the exercise of discretion, with $20 costs and disbursements to appellant, the cross motion of plaintiffs-respondents denied and the motion of defendant-appellant granted, with $10 costs. In this 1961 action for malpractice of a ship’s physician in 1960, plaintiff fails to justify sufficiently the failure to serve a complaint after [782]*782the stipulation extending time to do so expired on September 17, 1962 (see Sortino v. Fisher, 20 A D 2d 25). Concur — Breitel, J. P., Rabin, Valente, Stevens and Staley, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

21 A.D.2d 781, 250 N.Y.S.2d 974, 1964 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3438, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/riccobono-v-italian-line-nyappdiv-1964.