Young v. Harrington

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Young v. Harrington

90 A.D.2d 990, 456 N.Y.S.2d 587, 1982 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 19276

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

DecidedNovember 9, 1982

StatusPublished

This text of 90 A.D.2d 990 (Young v. Harrington) 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

Young v. Harrington, 90 A.D.2d 990, 456 N.Y.S.2d 587, 1982 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 19276 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1982).

Pincite

Opinion

Order unanimously affirmed, without costs. Memorandum: In view of the unnecessarily protracted proceedings in this case and the periodic inaction by both sides, we cannot say that Special Term abused its discretion in granting a conditional order of preclusion. In order to move this case closer to trial, we direct that all discovery be completed within 20 days from receipt of our order herein and that the action thereafter proceeds to trial without further adjournment or delay. If defendants fail to arrange for the deposition within that time, their right to do so will be waived. (Appeal from order of Supreme Court, Erie County, Doyle, J. — preclusion.) Present — Simons, J. P., Callahan, Doerr, Boomer and Moule, JJ.

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

Order unanimously affirmed, without costs. Memorandum: In view of the unnecessarily protracted proceedings in this case and the periodic inaction by both sides, we cannot say that Special Term abused its discretion in granting a conditional order of preclusion. In order to move this case closer to trial, we direct that all discovery be completed within 20 days from receipt of our order herein and that the action thereafter proceeds to trial without further adjournment or delay. If defendants fail to arrange for the deposition within that time, their right to do so will be waived. (Appeal from order of Supreme Court, Erie County, Doyle, J. — preclusion.) Present — Simons, J. P., Callahan, Doerr, Boomer and Moule, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

90 A.D.2d 990, 456 N.Y.S.2d 587, 1982 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 19276, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/young-v-harrington-nyappdiv-1982.