Zoellner v. Neumann

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Zoellner v. Neumann

13 A.D.2d 723, 214 N.Y.S.2d 31, 1961 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11149

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

DecidedMay 2, 1961

StatusPublished

This text of 13 A.D.2d 723 (Zoellner v. Neumann) 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

Zoellner v. Neumann, 13 A.D.2d 723, 214 N.Y.S.2d 31, 1961 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11149 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1961).

Pincite

Opinion

Order entered on June 16, 1960, denying plaintiff’s motion to vacate the stay of trial of this cause and granting defendants’ cross motion to dismiss this action for failure to prosecute, unanimously reversed, on the law, on the facts and in the exercise of discretion, without costs, the motion granted and the cross motion denied. The stay of the trial, pending the return of the commission on the written interrogatories directed to the witness in Holland, prevented the trial of this cause. It would appear neither party for a substantial period thereafter was aware of the return of the commission. The nature of the action, and the absence of any claim of prejudice to the defendants, in the circumstances, move the court to exercise its discretion towards the end of a prompt disposition on the merits. Settle order on notice. Concur — Botein, P. J., Rabin, McNally and Stevens, JJ.

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

Order entered on June 16, 1960, denying plaintiff’s motion to vacate the stay of trial of this cause and granting defendants’ cross motion to dismiss this action for failure to prosecute, unanimously reversed, on the law, on the facts and in the exercise of discretion, without costs, the motion granted and the cross motion denied. The stay of the trial, pending the return of the commission on the written interrogatories directed to the witness in Holland, prevented the trial of this cause. It would appear neither party for a substantial period thereafter was aware of the return of the commission. The nature of the action, and the absence of any claim of prejudice to the defendants, in the circumstances, move the court to exercise its discretion towards the end of a prompt disposition on the merits. Settle order on notice. Concur — Botein, P. J., Rabin, McNally and Stevens, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

13 A.D.2d 723, 214 N.Y.S.2d 31, 1961 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11149, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/zoellner-v-neumann-nyappdiv-1961.