Wund v. Robinson

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Wund v. Robinson

33 A.D.2d 900, 307 N.Y.S.2d 816, 1970 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5646

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

DecidedJanuary 27, 1970

StatusPublished

This text of 33 A.D.2d 900 (Wund v. Robinson) 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

Wund v. Robinson, 33 A.D.2d 900, 307 N.Y.S.2d 816, 1970 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5646 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1970).

Pincite

Opinion

Order entered May 21, 1969, which suspended the prosecution of this action, unanimously reversed on the law and the facts, without costs or disbursements to either party, and the case is restored to the Trial Calendar. There is absent a medical affidavit to support the plaintiff’s request as against the uncontested report of the court appointed physician. Further, there is such a ready question of prejudice vis-a-vis the defendant and the availability of witnesses in the future, no substantial reason is advanced that would warrant affording this case trial treatment different from any other case of similar character. Concur • — ■ Capozzoli, J. P., MeGivern, Markewich and Nunez, JJ.

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

Order entered May 21, 1969, which suspended the prosecution of this action, unanimously reversed on the law and the facts, without costs or disbursements to either party, and the case is restored to the Trial Calendar. There is absent a medical affidavit to support the plaintiff’s request as against the uncontested report of the court appointed physician. Further, there is such a ready question of prejudice vis-a-vis the defendant and the availability of witnesses in the future, no substantial reason is advanced that would warrant affording this case trial treatment different from any other case of similar character. Concur • — ■ Capozzoli, J. P., MeGivern, Markewich and Nunez, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

33 A.D.2d 900, 307 N.Y.S.2d 816, 1970 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5646, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wund-v-robinson-nyappdiv-1970.