From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Milbank v. Lauersen

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 28, 1992
188 A.D.2d 644 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)

Opinion

December 28, 1992

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Burke, J.).


Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The granting of the defendant's motion would have vitiated the stipulation whereby the plaintiffs extended the defendant's time to serve its answer in exchange for a waiver by the defendant of the defense of lack of personal jurisdiction. Because setting aside the stipulation could have irrevocably upset the status quo, resulting in the dismissal of the complaint, the motion was properly denied (cf., Matter of Frutiger, 29 N.Y.2d 143, 149). Bracken, J.P., Lawrence, Miller, Copertino and Santucci, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Milbank v. Lauersen

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 28, 1992
188 A.D.2d 644 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)
Case details for

Milbank v. Lauersen

Case Details

Full title:NATALIE MILBANK et al., Respondents, v. NEILS H. LAUERSEN, Appellant

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

Date published: Dec 28, 1992

Citations

188 A.D.2d 644 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)

Citing Cases

Verkhoglyand v. Benimovich

By stipulation dated April 24, 2017, the plaintiffs extended the defendants time to serve an answer to the…

Verkhoglyad v. Benimovich

On a motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(8), the plaintiff has the…