From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Attie v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Nov 28, 1995
221 A.D.2d 274 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)

Opinion

November 28, 1995

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Jane Solomon, J.).


Denial of severance would likely have caused an inordinate delay of trial of the main action ( cf., Leavitt v New York City Tr. Auth., 111 A.D.2d 907, 908). Plaintiff completed discovery and filed a note of issue pursuant to the IAS Court's orders and would be prejudiced by such delay ( see, Miro v Branford House, 174 A.D.2d 363). Appellant did not take the opportunity to conduct a physical examination within the scheduled deadline. In these circumstances, the motion to strike the note of issue was properly denied ( see, Hamlin v Mensch, 205 A.D.2d 452; Levine v McFarland, 98 A.D.2d 795).

Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Ellerin, Ross, Nardelli and Tom, JJ.


Summaries of

Attie v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Nov 28, 1995
221 A.D.2d 274 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
Case details for

Attie v. City of New York

Case Details

Full title:PAULETTE ATTIE, Respondent, v. CITY OF NEW YORK, Defendant, and TRUSTEES…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: Nov 28, 1995

Citations

221 A.D.2d 274 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
634 N.Y.S.2d 88

Citing Cases

Taylor v. Paskoff & Tamber, LLP

on other grounds14 N.Y.3d 874, 903 N.Y.S.2d 333, 929 N.E.2d 396 [2010];see also Aaron v. Roemer, Wallens &…

Taylor v. Paskoff Tamber

CPLR 1010 provides that the court may exercise its discretion in choosing to sever or dismiss a third-party…