Giammanco v. City of New York
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the Court
Under the rules of this court in effect at the time the plaintiff moved to restore this action to the Trial Calendar, the plaintiff was required to show "(1) the merits of the action; (2) the reasons for the acts or omissions wherefor it was struck from the calendar; and (3) good cause why it should be restored” (see, 22 NYCRR former 675.5 [b]; see also, Fluman v ISS Dept. Stores, 100 AD2d 838; Pirnak v Savino, 96 AD2d 857; Monacelli v Board of Educ., 92 AD2d 930). The affidavit of the plaintiff and affirmation of her attorney were not sufficient to sustain this burden because they were…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Fluman v. TSS Department StoresAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1984
- Monahan v. FioreAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1979
- Monacelli v. Board of Education of City School DistrictAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1983
- Pirnak v. SavinoAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1983
- Rothenberg v. Parkway Exterminating Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1982
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Daskal v. StateNew York Court of Claims · 1987
- Goldman v. City of New YorkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2001