From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Joseph v. Exxon Corporation

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jul 6, 1981
83 A.D.2d 549 (N.Y. App. Div. 1981)

Opinion

July 6, 1981


In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injuries and property damages, plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Monteleone, J.), dated January 19, 1981, which denied their motion for leave to file a demand for a jury trial, nunc pro tunc. Order affirmed, with $50 costs and disbursements. Special Term properly exercised its discretion in denying plaintiffs' motion in view of their failure, by an adequate factual showing, to demonstrate that the acts of their attorney in placing an "X" mark in the box on the note of issue before the words "Trial without jury", and filing same without payment of a jury fee, were inadvertent. Furthermore, there was an inordinate delay, of over three months, before plaintiffs moved, on the eve of trial, for leave to file a jury demand nunc pro tunc (see Zelvin v. Pagliocca, 32 A.D.2d 561; Fils v Diener, 59 A.D.2d 522). Mollen, P.J., Mangano, Gibbons and Margett, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Joseph v. Exxon Corporation

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jul 6, 1981
83 A.D.2d 549 (N.Y. App. Div. 1981)
Case details for

Joseph v. Exxon Corporation

Case Details

Full title:DIEUVEUIL JOSEPH et al., Appellants, v. EXXON CORPORATION et al.…

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

Date published: Jul 6, 1981

Citations

83 A.D.2d 549 (N.Y. App. Div. 1981)

Citing Cases

Tarantino v. City of New York

trial (see, CPLR 4102 [a]) and the action was placed on the Jury Trial Calendar. Not until 1988 did the…

Sumba v. Sampaio

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs. The defendants failed to make an adequate factual showing…