Schapira v. National City Bank

New York Supreme Court

Schapira v. National City Bank

170 Misc. 1065, 11 N.Y.S.2d 693, 1939 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1781

New York Supreme Court·Decided May 1, 1939·Published

Opinion

Cuff, J.

Motion to strike this case from the jury calendar and place it upon the non-jury calendar. I am satisfied that plaintiff’s attorney made an excusable error in not filing his demand for a jury trial. He noted that demand upon his note of issue, but, due to inadvertence, failed to file his separate demand. He endeavored [1066]*1066to correct his mistake the following day. He should not be so severely punished as to deprive his client of a jury trial by reason of such an insignificant lapse. This court has power to relieve him (See Civ. Prac. Act, § 105) and has done so. (See New York Investors, Inc., v. Laurelton Homes, Inc., 230 App. Div. 712.) Motion denied.

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

Cuff, J.

Motion to strike this case from the jury calendar and place it upon the non-jury calendar. I am satisfied that plaintiff’s attorney made an excusable error in not filing his demand for a jury trial. He noted that demand upon his note of issue, but, due to inadvertence, failed to file his separate demand. He endeavored [1066]*1066to correct his mistake the following day. He should not be so severely punished as to deprive his client of a jury trial by reason of such an insignificant lapse. This court has power to relieve him (See Civ. Prac. Act, § 105) and has done so. (See New York Investors, Inc., v. Laurelton Homes, Inc., 230 App. Div. 712.) Motion denied.

Schapira v. National City Bank, 170 Misc. 1065, 11 N.Y.S.2d 693, 1939 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1781 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1939).

Pincite

170 Misc. 1065 (Schapira v. National City Bank) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related