Stein v. West Sayville Pharmacy, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Stein v. West Sayville Pharmacy, Inc.

18 A.D.2d 697, 235 N.Y.S.2d 968, 1962 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6377

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

DecidedDecember 17, 1962

StatusPublished

This text of 18 A.D.2d 697 (Stein v. West Sayville Pharmacy, 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.

Bluebook

Stein v. West Sayville Pharmacy, Inc., 18 A.D.2d 697, 235 N.Y.S.2d 968, 1962 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6377 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1962).

Pincite

Opinion

In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injury, loss of services and medical expenses, defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, dated May 2, 1962, which granted defendant’s motion to dismiss the complaint for lack of prosecution, on condition that plaintiffs serve and file a note of issue for a subsequent term of the court (Civ. Prac. Act, § 181; Rules Civ. Prae., rule 156). Order modified in the exercise of discretion by striking out its decretal paragraph, and by substituting therefor a paragraph granting unconditionally defendant’s said motion. As so modified, order affirmed, without costs. Plaintiffs failed to submit any papers explaining their failure, for a period of 34 months after joinder of issue, to notice the case for trial. Nor did plaintiff file an affidavit of merits. Under the circumstances, there was no basis for the exercise of discretion in plaintiffs’ favor (Fiorello v. Towers Management Corp., 6 A D 2d 677; Topp v. Casco Prods. Corp., 8 A D 2d 727; Costanzo v. Schwedler, 14 A D 2d 814; Siegel v. City of New York, 16 A D 2d 679). Beldock, P. J., Kleinfeld, Christ, Rabin and Hopkins, JJ., concur.

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

In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injury, loss of services and medical expenses, defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, dated May 2, 1962, which granted defendant’s motion to dismiss the complaint for lack of prosecution, on condition that plaintiffs serve and file a note of issue for a subsequent term of the court (Civ. Prac. Act, § 181; Rules Civ. Prae., rule 156). Order modified in the exercise of discretion by striking out its decretal paragraph, and by substituting therefor a paragraph granting unconditionally defendant’s said motion. As so modified, order affirmed, without costs. Plaintiffs failed to submit any papers explaining their failure, for a period of 34 months after joinder of issue, to notice the case for trial. Nor did plaintiff file an affidavit of merits. Under the circumstances, there was no basis for the exercise of discretion in plaintiffs’ favor (Fiorello v. Towers Management Corp., 6 A D 2d 677; Topp v. Casco Prods. Corp., 8 A D 2d 727; Costanzo v. Schwedler, 14 A D 2d 814; Siegel v. City of New York, 16 A D 2d 679). Beldock, P. J., Kleinfeld, Christ, Rabin and Hopkins, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

18 A.D.2d 697, 235 N.Y.S.2d 968, 1962 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6377, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/stein-v-west-sayville-pharmacy-inc-nyappdiv-1962.