From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Martyn v. Jones

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 9, 1990
166 A.D.2d 508 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)

Opinion

October 9, 1990

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Nassau County (McCabe, J.).


Ordered that the order is reversed, as a matter of discretion, with costs, the motion is granted, the cross motion is denied, and the matter is remitted to the Supreme Court, Nassau County, for an inquest on the issue of damages.

The Supreme Court's denial of the plaintiff's motion and its granting of the defendants' cross motion was an improvident exercise of discretion. It was incumbent upon the defendants to show a reasonable excuse for the seven-month delay in serving their answer (CPLR 3012 [d]; 5015 [a]). In this case the only excuse offered was that on "receipt of the suit papers the matter was somehow overlooked by the insurance carrier". That excuse is insufficient under the circumstances of this case (see, Peters v Pickard, 143 A.D.2d 81, 82; Chochla v. Oak Beach Inn Corp., 115 A.D.2d 584, 585). Mangano, P.J., Kunzeman, Kooper, Sullivan and Ritter, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Martyn v. Jones

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 9, 1990
166 A.D.2d 508 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)
Case details for

Martyn v. Jones

Case Details

Full title:DANIEL MARTYN, Appellant, v. RICHARD JONES et al., Respondents

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

Date published: Oct 9, 1990

Citations

166 A.D.2d 508 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)
560 N.Y.S.2d 789

Citing Cases

Vuecom, Inc. v. Century 21 Rand [2d Dept 1999

In the instant case, the court improvidently exercised its discretion in granting the defendants' motion to…

Vuecom, Inc. v. Century 21 Rand

In the instant case, the court improvidently exercised its discretion in granting the defendants' motion to…