Murphy v. D. V. Waste Control Corp.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the Court
Although the length of the defendants’ delay in serving their answer (more than six months) cannot be considered minor (see, Association for Children with Learning Disabilities v Zafar, 115 AD2d 580; Klenk v Kent, 103 AD2d 1002, appeal dismissed 63 NY2d 953), and the only explanation proffered for the delay was the negligence of the defendants’ insurance broker, which is " 'akin to a law office failure’ ” Strasser v Pendino, 92 AD2d 590, quoting from Bruno v Village of Port Chester, 77 AD2d 580, appeal dismissed 51 NY2d 769), the court did not abuse its discretion in granting the defendants’…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Bruno v. Village of Port ChesterAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1980
- Stolpiec v. WienerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1984
- Klenk v. KentAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1984
- Claim of Leeds v. County of WestchesterNew York Court of Appeals · 1984
- Ass'n for Children with Learning Disabilities v. ZafarAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1985
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Juseinoski v. Board of EducationAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2005
- Dodge v. CommanderAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2005
- Loris v. S & W Realty Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2005
- Sound Shore Medical Center v. Lumbermens Mutual Casualty Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2006
- Ganvey Merchandising Corp. v. Knudsen Elevator Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1991
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.