From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Prote Contracting v. Board of Education

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 19, 1998
250 A.D.2d 487 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)

Opinion

May 19, 1998

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


Plaintiff failed to demonstrate a reasonable excuse for the delay in moving to restore this case or a lack of intention to abandon it ( cf., Weiss v. City of New York, 247 A.D.2d 239). Although plaintiff originally included this action in unsuccessful negotiations between the parties and sought to consolidate it with other actions, the present motion to restore has been preceded by a one and one-half year period of complete inactivity. Plaintiff has offered no excuse, let alone a reasonable one, for this delay.

Concur — Milonas, J.P., Rosenberger, Nardelli, Wallach and Rubin, JJ.


Summaries of

Prote Contracting v. Board of Education

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 19, 1998
250 A.D.2d 487 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
Case details for

Prote Contracting v. Board of Education

Case Details

Full title:PROTE CONTRACTING Co., INC., Appellant, v. BOARD OF EDUCATION OF THE CITY…

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

Date published: May 19, 1998

Citations

250 A.D.2d 487 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
672 N.Y.S.2d 703