From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Cooper v. Martin

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 1, 1927
222 App. Div. 765 (N.Y. App. Div. 1927)

Opinion

December, 1927


Order granting plaintiff's motion to serve second amended complaint and denying defendants' motion to dismiss complaint for lack of prosecution reversed upon the law and the facts, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, motion for leave to serve second amended complaint denied, with ten dollars costs, and defendants' motion to dismiss complaint granted, with ten dollars costs, because of the unreasonable delay in prosecuting the action after the beginning of the reference. The fact that defendants had interposed a counterclaim did not affect their right to move for a dismissal because of plaintiff's unreasonable delay. (See Fleischman v. Mengis, 113 N.Y. Supp. 515.) Jacot v. Marks ( 26 Misc. 670), cited by respondent as authority to the contrary, was reversed. ( Jacot v. Marks, 46 App. Div. 531.) Upon consent of defendants, their counterclaim is dismissed, without costs. Lazansky, P.J., Rich, Kapper, Seeger and Carswell, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Cooper v. Martin

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 1, 1927
222 App. Div. 765 (N.Y. App. Div. 1927)
Case details for

Cooper v. Martin

Case Details

Full title:GUSTAV A. COOPER, Respondent, v. GREGORY E. MARTIN and Others, Appellants

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

Date published: Dec 1, 1927

Citations

222 App. Div. 765 (N.Y. App. Div. 1927)

Citing Cases

City of Jefferson v. Capital City

In Fleischman v. Mengis, Sup., 113 N.Y.S. 515, it was again held that the fact that a defendant had…