From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Khayat v. Gill

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Dec 5, 2000
278 A.D.2d 15 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)

Opinion

December 5, 2000.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Paula Omanksy, J.), entered on or about August 17, 1999, which granted plaintiff's motion to vacate the action's dismissal and restore the case to the calendar on certain conditions, unanimously affirmed, without costs. Appeal from order, same court and Justice, entered May 5, 2000, withdrawn pursuant to the stipulation of the parties dated October 19, 2000.

Thomas Torto, for plaintiff-respondent.

Stuart M. Bodoff, for defendants-appellants.

Before: Williams, J.P., Mazzarelli, Ellerin, Wallach, Rubin, JJ.


Plaintiff demonstrated a reasonable excuse for the delay in moving to restore the action, a meritorious case, a lack of prejudice to defendants, and the absence of an intent to abandon the matter (see,Sanchez v. Javind Apt. Corp., 246 A.D.2d 353).

Taking the "over-all circumstances" into account (see, Nicholos v. Cashelard Restaurant, 249 A.D.2d 187, 190), the appealed order constituted a proper exercise of discretion.

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.


Summaries of

Khayat v. Gill

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Dec 5, 2000
278 A.D.2d 15 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
Case details for

Khayat v. Gill

Case Details

Full title:FIDA SABBOURI KHAYAT, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, v. LORRAINE GILL, ET AL.…

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

Date published: Dec 5, 2000

Citations

278 A.D.2d 15 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
716 N.Y.S.2d 855

Citing Cases

McCluskey v. Ferriter

Plaintiffs are required to demonstrate a reasonable excuse for the refusal, merit to their case, lack of…