From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Bailey v. Central Dry Cleaning Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Nov 15, 1957
4 A.D.2d 1007 (N.Y. App. Div. 1957)

Opinion

November 15, 1957

Appeal from the Erie Special Term.

Present — Vaughan, J.P., Kimball, Williams, Bastow and Goldman, JJ.


Order reversed in the exercise of discretion, without costs of this appeal to any party, and motion denied, without costs. Memorandum: The discretion of Special Term in excusing the defaults of the plaintiffs was not providently exercised. They delayed for 28 months after receiving notices of appearance before endeavoring to serve the complaints. The defendant was justified in refusing to accept service. It is undisputed that some two months after receiving notices of appearance defendant's counsel inquired of one of plaintiff's attorneys and was informed that the attorney had not prepared the complaints. The excuse proffered that the file was misplaced by plaintiffs' attorneys is inadequate to explain the delay. (Cf. Fischetti v. 242 East 19th St. Corp., 4 A.D.2d 867; Moshman v. City of New York, 3 A.D.2d 824.) In the exercise of a proper discretion the motion should have been denied. All concur, Vaughan, J.P., not voting.


Summaries of

Bailey v. Central Dry Cleaning Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Nov 15, 1957
4 A.D.2d 1007 (N.Y. App. Div. 1957)
Case details for

Bailey v. Central Dry Cleaning Co.

Case Details

Full title:GLADYS W. BAILEY, Respondent, v. CENTRAL DRY CLEANING CO., Appellant…

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

Date published: Nov 15, 1957

Citations

4 A.D.2d 1007 (N.Y. App. Div. 1957)

Citing Cases

Tracey v. McKenna

The plaintiff, having failed to present facts showing any reasonable excuse for the delay of over 18 months…