From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Shapiro v. Prudential Theaters

District Court of Nassau County, Third District
Apr 18, 1972
69 Misc. 2d 1100 (N.Y. Dist. Ct. 1972)

Opinion

April 18, 1972

Jules Schwabinger for plaintiffs.

William Gold for defendant.

Kreisel Passin for Charles Harrow, third-party defendant.


Defendant has appealed from an order denying its motion to dismiss the complaint. Defendant now seeks a stay pursuant to CPLR 5519 (subd. [c]).

The court does not feel that it should exercise its discretion in granting this stay and thus unduly delay the trial of this action. (See Matter of Rivette, 283 App. Div. 851.) In view of the fact that the moving papers do not reveal any reasons why this application should be granted, it is the feeling of this court that the application should properly be made to the Appellate Term, where appropriate conditions such as setting a date when the appeal should be perfected and brought on for argument can be imposed.

Defendant's motion for a stay pending determination of the appeal herein is accordingly denied without prejudice to an application for similar relief to the Appellate Term.


Summaries of

Shapiro v. Prudential Theaters

District Court of Nassau County, Third District
Apr 18, 1972
69 Misc. 2d 1100 (N.Y. Dist. Ct. 1972)
Case details for

Shapiro v. Prudential Theaters

Case Details

Full title:SIDNEY SHAPIRO et al., Plaintiffs, v. PRUDENTIAL THEATERS, Defendant and…

Court:District Court of Nassau County, Third District

Date published: Apr 18, 1972

Citations

69 Misc. 2d 1100 (N.Y. Dist. Ct. 1972)
332 N.Y.S.2d 917

Citing Cases

People ex Rel. Drake v. Oslwyn

The appellate court having control of its own calendar can impose conditions requiring the appeal to be…