From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Tsikos v. Ottas

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 12, 1996
233 A.D.2d 389 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)

Opinion

November 12, 1996.

In an action, inter alia, for a judgraent declaring the plaintiffs to be the absolute owners of certain real property, the defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Goldstein, J.), dated October 10, 1995, which denied their motion to vacate the note of issue and certificate of readiness and to strike the proceedings from the trial calendar.

Before: Rosenblatt, J.P., Thompson, Santucci and Altman, JJ.


Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in refusing to strike this action from the trial calendar upon the appellants' allegation that discovery proceedings had not yet been completed ( see, Matter of Long Is. Light. Co. v Assessor of Town of Brookhaven, 122 AD2d 794).

Although the appellants contend that the matter should be stricken from the trial calendar on the ground, inter alia, that depositions of the plaintiffs are still pending, they fail to provide any valid reason for their delay of more than three years in pursuing discovery.


Summaries of

Tsikos v. Ottas

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 12, 1996
233 A.D.2d 389 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
Case details for

Tsikos v. Ottas

Case Details

Full title:THEODORE P. TSIKOS et al., Respondents, v. NOMI OTTAS et al., Appellants

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

Date published: Nov 12, 1996

Citations

233 A.D.2d 389 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
650 N.Y.S.2d 566

Citing Cases

Ford v. J.R.D. Management Corp.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs. The court did not improvidently…