From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Ackerman v. Perchikoff

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 10, 1968
30 A.D.2d 672 (N.Y. App. Div. 1968)

Opinion

June 10, 1968


Appeal by plaintiff (1) from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated October 20, 1966, which denied her motion (a) to vacate the automatic dismissal of the action (CPLR 3404) and (b) to restore the action to the Trial Calendar and (2) from so much of an order of said court dated February 3, 1967 and made on reargument, as adhered to the original decision. Appeal from the order dated October 20, 1966 dismissed, without costs. That order was superseded by the order on reargument. Order dated February 3, 1967 reversed insofar as appealed from, with $10 costs and disbursements, and original motion granted. In our opinion, the record indicates a meritorious cause of action, no intention to abandon the action on the part of plaintiff and no merit to defendant's claim of prejudice ( Marco v. Sachs, 10 N.Y.2d 542; Tactuk v. Freiberg, 24 A.D.2d 503; Boyle v. Krebs Schulz Motors, 18 A.D.2d 1010; Blau v. Levine, 28 A.D.2d 1137). Beldock, P.J., Christ, Brennan, Hopkins and Benjamin, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Ackerman v. Perchikoff

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 10, 1968
30 A.D.2d 672 (N.Y. App. Div. 1968)
Case details for

Ackerman v. Perchikoff

Case Details

Full title:BESSIE ACKERMAN, as Executrix of ISAAC J. ACKERMAN, Deceased, Appellant…

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

Date published: Jun 10, 1968

Citations

30 A.D.2d 672 (N.Y. App. Div. 1968)

Citing Cases

Peterson v. Motor Sales Co. of Kingsport, Inc.

CPLR 3404 is not to be rigidly applied in all circumstances. It merely creates a presumption of abandonment…

Matter of Levine

In our opinion, the record indicates a meritorious defense to the demand for arbitration, no intention on the…