Dietz v. Dietz

Kimple v. Auble
87 Misc. 2d 997 (N.Y. Cnty. Ct. 1976) Cited 3 times
In Kimple v Auble (87 Misc.2d 997), the court suggested that it had inherent authority to impose an obligation upon an attorney to pay court costs where there had been some neglect or delinquency on his part in the performance of his duties to his client and to the court as an officer thereof.
Terms may be imposed on a party although an excusable default. (Solomon v Terlizi, 15 A.D.2d 802; Dietz v Dietz, 12 A.D.2d 972; Chauncey Real Estate Co. v Burkaloff, 13 Misc.2d 442; Hensey Props. v La Magna, 23 A.D.2d 742.) The order of January 19, 1976, which vacates the default judgment is modified on the facts and the law, striking therefrom the following: "That John Lo Pinto, Esq., attorney for the defendants herein pay to the plaintiffs".