From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Rosenstein v. Rothenberg

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Oct 20, 1959
9 A.D.2d 663 (N.Y. App. Div. 1959)

Opinion

October 20, 1959


The order and judgment appealed from are reversed on the facts and in the exercise of discretion, without costs to either party, and the motion to dismiss denied upon the condition that a note of issue be filed immediately for the next succeeding term of court. This action, commenced in 1957, should have been concluded and its speedy termination now becomes imperative particularly in view of the existing attachment. The leisurely pace of the proceedings to date as exemplified by the conduct of counsel in pretrial proceedings persuades us there was no unreasonable neglect to prosecute (Civ. Prac. Act, § 181) nor any abandonment of the action. Also, Special Term indicated possible merit to the claim. Ample opportunity having been afforded the parties for steps preliminary to the trial, and pretrial proceedings having been concluded, further delay of course would be inexcusable.

Concur — Botein, P.J., Breitel, McNally, Stevens and Bastow, JJ.


Summaries of

Rosenstein v. Rothenberg

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Oct 20, 1959
9 A.D.2d 663 (N.Y. App. Div. 1959)
Case details for

Rosenstein v. Rothenberg

Case Details

Full title:NEIL ROSENSTEIN, Appellant, v. SELMA ROTHENBERG, Respondent

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

Date published: Oct 20, 1959

Citations

9 A.D.2d 663 (N.Y. App. Div. 1959)

Citing Cases

Kasiuba v. New York Times Co.

Some of these factors are the degree of merit in plaintiff's case, a demonstration of prejudice to defendant…

Taylor v. Edwards

When he received the 45-day notice and was required to proceed expeditiously, he could not do so because…