Legal Opinion

Evans v. Kringstein

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided March 11, 1996PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

A plaintiff who seeks to restore a case to the trial calendar within a year following its being stricken therefrom must bear the burden of demonstrating, inter alia, the existence of a meritorious cause of action (see, Barton v Jablon, 181 AD2d 755; see also, Public Adm’r of County of N. Y. v Heil Corp., 126 AD2d 533). The plaintiff has failed to establish this.

The affidavit of the plaintiff’s expert is insufficient to establish merit since this affidavit does not "make specific observations as to the procedures or treatments performed or the alleged improprieties therein” (Nepomniaschi v…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Nepomniaschi v. GoldsteinAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1992
  2. Barton v. JablonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1992
  3. Public Administrator v. Heil Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1987

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Guzman v. Members America Credit UnionCivil Court of the City of New York · 1997
  2. Gannon v. LammAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2000

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API