From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Mundo v. Maschinenfabrik

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Feb 27, 1996
224 A.D.2d 343 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)

Opinion

February 27, 1996

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Bronx County (Stanley Green, J.).


Defendant's motion for summary judgment, made some eight years after the accident and five years after commencement of the action, was properly granted for plaintiff's failure to specify any defect in the bonding press in which his hand was caught ( see, Jerry v. Borden Co., 45 A.D.2d 344, 348). While plaintiffs did submit an expert's affidavit suggesting a design defect as the cause of the injury on their motion to renew, this was properly rejected by the IAS Court as inexcusably belated, with an apt reference to the principle that "[r]enewal is granted sparingly * * * it is not a second chance freely given to parties who have not exercised due diligence in making their first factual presentation" ( Matter of Beiny, 132 A.D.2d 190, 210, lv dismissed 71 N.Y.2d 994; see also, Matter of Barnes v. State of New York, 159 A.D.2d 753, lv dismissed 76 N.Y.2d 935).

Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Ellerin, Rubin, Kupferman and Williams, JJ.


Summaries of

Mundo v. Maschinenfabrik

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Feb 27, 1996
224 A.D.2d 343 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
Case details for

Mundo v. Maschinenfabrik

Case Details

Full title:JOSE MUNDO et al., Appellants, v. SMS HASENCLEVER MASCHINENFABRIK…

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

Date published: Feb 27, 1996

Citations

224 A.D.2d 343 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
638 N.Y.S.2d 68

Citing Cases

Welch Foods, Inc. v. Wilson

ncy manual, and comparisons of the Village of Westfield's water treatment plant user charges with those of…

Sullivan v. Harnisch

The trial court properly denied defendants' motion to renew as to consequential damages, as defendants did…