From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Reuter v. Schroeder

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jul 19, 1993
195 A.D.2d 543 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)

Opinion

July 19, 1993

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Dutchess County (Jiudice, J.).


Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

In light of the brief delay, the absence of prejudice, the plaintiff's showing of a reasonable excuse, and the potential merit of his claim, we find that the Supreme Court permissibly exercised its discretion in denying the defendant's motion to dismiss the complaint pursuant to CPLR 3012 (b) (see, Shopsin v Siben Siben, 189 A.D.2d 811; Gordineer v. Gallagher, 160 A.D.2d 672). Thompson, J.P., Balletta, Miller and Santucci, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Reuter v. Schroeder

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jul 19, 1993
195 A.D.2d 543 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)
Case details for

Reuter v. Schroeder

Case Details

Full title:DAVID J. REUTER, Respondent, v. HENRY SCHROEDER, Appellant

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

Date published: Jul 19, 1993

Citations

195 A.D.2d 543 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)
601 N.Y.S.2d 837

Citing Cases

Kramer v. Rosenthal

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs. Given the short delay and the lack…

Klosterman v. Federal Express Company

Given the short delay and the lack of any prejudice, the Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion…