From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Durand v. Gaslight Club, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Mar 30, 1967
27 A.D.2d 835 (N.Y. App. Div. 1967)

Opinion

March 30, 1967


Order entered June 22, 1966, granting motion to vacate the preclusion order on condition that a full bill of particulars is served within five days, and further granting motion to dismiss unless plaintiff file a note of issue and statement of readiness within 20 days, unanimously reversed, on the law and the facts, with $30 costs and disbursements to the appellant. The motion to dismiss is granted unconditionally, with $10 costs. Thus the branch of the appeal relating to the preclusion order becomes academic. The delay herein was inordinate and not adequately explained. There was not only a failure to comply with the 45-day demand requirement of CPLR 3216 but also an impermissible general delay in the prosecution of the action. ( Thomas v. Melbert Foods, 19 N.Y.2d 216.) Even if the prior attorney's neglect were excusable (which it is not, Walker v. Ferri, 5 A.D.2d 24) the subsequent conduct of the case by the second attorney was not characterized by expedition.

Concur — Botein, P.J., Stevens, McNally, McGivern and Witmer, JJ.


Summaries of

Durand v. Gaslight Club, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Mar 30, 1967
27 A.D.2d 835 (N.Y. App. Div. 1967)
Case details for

Durand v. Gaslight Club, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:OSCAR G. DURAND, Respondent, v. GASLIGHT CLUB, INC., Appellant

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

Date published: Mar 30, 1967

Citations

27 A.D.2d 835 (N.Y. App. Div. 1967)

Citing Cases

Amelivia v. Roth

There was not only a failure to comply with the 45-day demand requirement of CPLR 3216, but also the action…