Schwartz v. Sunlight Apartments, Inc.
This text of 274 A.D. 901 (Schwartz v. Sunlight Apartments, Inc.) 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.
Opinion
Appeal from resettled order denying plaintiffs’ motion for leave to serve and file a demand for a jury trial nunc pro tune. Order reversed on the law and the facts, with $10 costs and disbursements, and the. motion granted, without costs. The facts show that there was no intention to waive a jury trial and that the failure to demand a jury trial was due to the inexperience of plaintiffs’ attorney’s assistant. Since the motion to be relieved from the inadvertence was made so soon after the mistake occurred and could not adversely affect the defendant, the relief should have been granted. (Storch v. High Grade Land Corp., 273 App. Div. 1010; Sorrin v. Lieberman & Rind, Inc., 270 App. Div. 823; 295 Classon Ave. Co. v. City of New York,, 267 App. Div. 961.) Carswell, Acting P. J., Johnston, Adel, Nolan and Wenzel, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
274 A.D. 901, 83 N.Y.S.2d 80, 1948 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3967, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/schwartz-v-sunlight-apartments-inc-nyappdiv-1948.