Wilson v. Misericordia Hospital

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Wilson v. Misericordia Hospital

244 A.D.2d 163, 665 N.Y.S.2d 269, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11090

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

DecidedNovember 6, 1997

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 244 A.D.2d 163 (Wilson v. Misericordia Hospital) 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

Wilson v. Misericordia Hospital, 244 A.D.2d 163, 665 N.Y.S.2d 269, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11090 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Luis Gonzalez, J.), entered January 23, 1996, which granted plaintiffs motion to vacate a prior order, granted on default, dismissing the action for failure to prosecute, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

There is no reason to overturn law of the case, established on a prior motion for failure to prosecute, that the action has merit. We agree with the motion court that plaintiff, who was misled by his former attorney concerning the status of the case and showed commendable resolve by going to the Departmental Disciplinary Committee, should not have to suffer dismissal of the action because of the unprofessional neglect of his former attorney. We perceive no undue prejudice attributable to the delay. Concur—Milonas, J. P., Ellerin, Wallach and Rubin, JJ.

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

—Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Luis Gonzalez, J.), entered January 23, 1996, which granted plaintiffs motion to vacate a prior order, granted on default, dismissing the action for failure to prosecute, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

There is no reason to overturn law of the case, established on a prior motion for failure to prosecute, that the action has merit. We agree with the motion court that plaintiff, who was misled by his former attorney concerning the status of the case and showed commendable resolve by going to the Departmental Disciplinary Committee, should not have to suffer dismissal of the action because of the unprofessional neglect of his former attorney. We perceive no undue prejudice attributable to the delay. Concur—Milonas, J. P., Ellerin, Wallach and Rubin, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

244 A.D.2d 163, 665 N.Y.S.2d 269, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11090, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wilson-v-misericordia-hospital-nyappdiv-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack