From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hipple v. Bloom

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 3, 1989
149 A.D.2d 406 (N.Y. App. Div. 1989)

Opinion

April 3, 1989

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Dachenhausen, J.).


Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The plaintiff's case was marked off the Trial Calendar in January 1983 after her counsel failed to appear at a calendar call. No motion was ever made to restore the action to the calendar. In September 1987 the plaintiff simply filed a new note of issue. The defendant's motion to strike the case from the Trial Calendar and to dismiss the complaint was properly granted. The plaintiff has not shown that her almost five-year delay in prosecution is excusable, that her action is meritorious, or that the defendant will not be prejudiced by its restoration (see, Monacelli v. Board of Educ., 92 A.D.2d 930; Sheehan v. Hollywood, 112 A.D.2d 211, 212). Mangano, J.P., Kooper, Sullivan and Harwood, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Hipple v. Bloom

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 3, 1989
149 A.D.2d 406 (N.Y. App. Div. 1989)
Case details for

Hipple v. Bloom

Case Details

Full title:MARY HIPPLE, Appellant, v. PERRY BLOOM, Doing Business as PERRY BLOOM…

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

Date published: Apr 3, 1989

Citations

149 A.D.2d 406 (N.Y. App. Div. 1989)