From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Beaugene v. Duo-Fast Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Jul 15, 1994
206 A.D.2d 971 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)

Opinion

July 15, 1994

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County, Dowd, J.

Present — Green, J.P., Balio, Fallon, Callahan and Davis, JJ.


Order unanimously reversed on the law with costs, motion granted and complaint reinstated. Memorandum: Supreme Court improvidently exercised its discretion in denying plaintiff's motion to restore the action to the trial calendar (see, CPLR 3404) and in dismissing the complaint. "[T]he failure to timely restore the case to the trial calendar creates only a presumption of abandonment, which may be rebutted by a conclusive showing that the party had no intention of abandoning the action (see, Marco v. Sachs, 10 N.Y.2d 542; McShan v. Dilbert's Quality Supermarkets, 33 A.D.2d 792)" (Fiorello v. South Shore Dental Assocs., 203 A.D.2d 323, 324). The record establishes that plaintiff never intended to abandon the action.


Summaries of

Beaugene v. Duo-Fast Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Jul 15, 1994
206 A.D.2d 971 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
Case details for

Beaugene v. Duo-Fast Corp.

Case Details

Full title:YVON BEAUGENE, Appellant, v. DUO-FAST CORP., Respondent

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

Date published: Jul 15, 1994

Citations

206 A.D.2d 971 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
616 N.Y.S.2d 287

Citing Cases

Collins v. Elbadawi

Plaintiffs also submitted expert proof of a meritorious cause of action. In addition, the record establishes…