Legal Opinion
Metropolitan Property & Casualty Insurance v. Roosevelt
New York Supreme Court
Decided February 4, 1993PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Joan B. Lefkowitz, J.
Plaintiff commenced its action on August 14, 1992. Defendant defaulted. Plaintiff wishes to enter judgment but failed to file the summons with proof of service. Plaintiff moves for a nunc pro tune order of filing. Plaintiff did purchase an index number in 1992.
*337The question presented by this ex parte application is whether the court has authority to issue a nunc pro tune order of filing where the action was commenced during the service-filing transitional period of July 1, 1992 to December 31, 1992, with the fee for an index number having been paid in…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- McCormack v. GomezAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1988
- City of New York v. New York Telephone Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1985
- In re FoleyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1988
- Michaud v. LussierNew York Court of Appeals · 1960
- Michaud v. LussierAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1958
3Cited by9 opinions
- De Maria v. SmithAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1994
- Kleinman v. MarshallNew York Supreme Court · 1993
- Slutzky v. Aron Estates Corp.New York Supreme Court · 1993
- Alexander v. County of WestchesterAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1998
- William Court — White Hill Road Homeowners Ass'n v. New York State Commissioner of Mental Retardation & Developmental DisabilitiesNew York Supreme Court · 1994
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.