From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Haley v. Zenzen

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Aug 1, 1961
14 A.D.2d 649 (N.Y. App. Div. 1961)

Opinion

August 1, 1961


Appeal from an order of a Special Term, Supreme Court, Albany County. Although the infant plaintiff had suffered a preclusion order on the failure of her former attorney to furnish a bill of particulars, her present attorney applied promptly upon being substituted for an order vacating the preclusion on condition that the bill of particulars be furnished. The affidavit of her present attorney showed on this motion his willingness to prepare the action and to proceed promptly with trial. We think that the Special Term was entirely justified in vacating the preclusion order and permitting the particulars to be served. Not only should the infant plaintiff be relieved from the neglect and default of her prior attorney in the prosecution of her action; but the discretion to vacate the preclusion lies well within the frame of management of the court's business exercised at Special Term. Order affirmed, with $10 costs. Bergan, P.J., Gibson, Reynolds and Taylor, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Haley v. Zenzen

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Aug 1, 1961
14 A.D.2d 649 (N.Y. App. Div. 1961)
Case details for

Haley v. Zenzen

Case Details

Full title:THELMA HALEY, an Infant, by RUTH HALEY, Her Guardian ad Litem, et al.…

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

Date published: Aug 1, 1961

Citations

14 A.D.2d 649 (N.Y. App. Div. 1961)

Citing Cases

McMahon v. Houser

Where the delay is "inordinate", the appellate courts have rarely sustained discretion exercised by Special…