Zygmunt Strokoski v. Harry A. Bullock - Supreme Court of New York

Zygmunt Strokoski v. Harry A. Bullock

By Supreme Court of New York

  • Release Date - Published: 1970-11-05
  • Book Genre: Law
  • Author: Supreme Court of New York
Our rating: 5/5 stars

Score: (From 0 Ratings)

Zygmunt Strokoski v. Harry A. Bullock Supreme Court of New York read online review & book description:

[35 A.D.2d 908 Page 908] Order reversed and motion granted in accordance with the following memorandum: Appellant's actions were stricken from the
Trial Calendar and placed on the general docket on January 20, 1969. Section 1085.8 of the Supreme Court Rules -- Oneida and
Onondaga County (then in effect, subsequently repealed July 1, 1970 [22 NYCRR 1085.8]) provided that a case stricken from
the Trial Calendar may be restored thereto on motion made within one year of the date of its removal upon showing good cause
for restoring it and further showing it to be qualified for placement on the Trial Calendar by filing a note of issue and
statement of readiness ( 1085.2). Appellant moved to restore the cases on December 11, 1969 (within the one-year period).
Affidavits in support of the motion allege that the actions were brought to recover damages for injuries sustained by plaintiff
on December 31, 1965; when the actions were reached for trial on Monday, January 20, 1969, plaintiff's attorney learned, and
informed the Trial Judge, that the physician who had treated plaintiff for the injuries was attending a medical convention
and would not return to Utica and be available to testify until the following Thursday. The cases were thereupon placed on
the general docket. It is further alleged that plaintiff is able to attend court and his attorney is prepared to proceed
with the trial of the actions as soon as they are reached for trial. Plaintiff's deposition taken in an examination before
trial, which shows that he has meritorious causes of action, was submitted to Special Term on the motion. Affidavits of attorneys
for the respective defendants do not dispute plaintiff's allegations but state that plaintiff failed to present a sufficient
affidavit of merits. The motion not being one to open a default, such an affidavit is not specifically required. Section 1085.8,
then in effect, did however require a showing of good cause for restoring the cases to the Trial Calendar. The facts shown
in plaintiff's deposition and his attorney's affidavits are sufficient to entitle him to restoration of his cases to the Trial
Calendar. Appellant is entitled to an order of restoration in accordance with subdivision (c) of 1024.13 of the Uniform Calendar
and Practice Rules for the Fourth Department which became effective on July 1, 1970. (22 NYCRR 1024.13.)

@2019 – Go Read a Book. All Right Reserved. goreadabook.org is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for website owners, to earn advertising fees by linking and advertising to amazon.com and any other website that may be affiliated with Amazon Service LLC Associates Program; As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.

Zygmunt Strokoski v. Harry A. Bullock book review Zygmunt Strokoski v. Harry A. Bullock ePUB; Supreme Court of New York; Law books.

Post a review about this book