Legal Opinion · Dissent

Yovannone v. Sibley's Department Store

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

Decided May 25, 1984Published

1Dissent

Boomer, J. (dissenting).

Plaintiffs were improperly granted relief from a conditional order of preclusion for failure to serve a bill of particulars. In view of the legislative overruling of Barasch/Eaton (CPLR 2005, L 1983, ch 318, § 1), the court now has discretion to excuse law office failures. In exercising this discretion we have held that the court should apply pre-Barasch standards (Eldre Components v Comten, Inc., 97 AD2d 940). Pre-Barasch, “[t]ime and again we have held that conditional orders of preclusion for failure to serve a bill of particulars may not be disregarded with…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Barasch v. MicucciNew York Court of Appeals · 1980
  2. Sortino v. FisherAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1963
  3. Williams v. Town of IrondequoitAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1977
  4. Raphael v. CohenNew York Court of Appeals · 1984
  5. Le Frois Foods Corp. v. Aetna InsuranceAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1975

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API