AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes

ASCHER KATZ et al., Respondents, v. KNOESEL SERVICE CENTER, INC., et al., Appellants.

Order modified, as a matter of discretion, by adding thereto a provision directing the plaintiffs' attorneys to personally pay the defendants $500. As so modified, order affirmed, without costs or disbursements. Plaintiffs' attorneys' time to pay $500 is extended to 15 days after service upon them of a copy of the order to be made hereon, with notice of entry.

Inasmuch as this is not a case of neglect or abandonment but, rather, a situation wherein the plaintiffs' good-faith efforts to pursue settlement negotiations with the defendants' insurance carrier constituted a reasonable excuse for the delay in serving the complaint, Special Term did not abuse its discretion in denying the defendants' application (see, Temkin v. New York Prop. Ins. Underwriters Assn., 92 A.D.2d 758). Where, as here, the action appears to have some merit, the delay in the service of the complaint was neither inordinately protracted nor willful and the defendants have not been prejudiced thereby, the plaintiffs should not be deprived of their day in court (see, Gordon v Shore Park Pharmacy, 70 A.D.2d 651). However, in view of the dilatoriness of plaintiffs' attorneys and their failure to move pursuant to CPLR 3012 (d) for an extension of time in which to serve the complaint, we have fixed an appropriate sanction. Lazer, J.P., Thompson, Weinstein and Eiber, JJ., concur.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

KATZ v. KNOESEL SERVICE CENTER, INC
(Feb 24, 1986)