Curro v. Marino

• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
• Writing for the Court: Before BREITEL; PER CURIAM
• Citation: Curro v. Marino, 217 N.Y.S.2d 106, 14 A.D.2d 526 (N.Y. App. Div. 1961)
• Decision Date: 06 July 1961
• Parties: Joseph CURRO, Plainfiff-Respondent, v. Louis A. MARINO, Defendant-Appellant, and Nicholas Di Menna & Son, Inc., Defendant.

Page 106

217 N.Y.S.2d 106

14 A.D.2d 526

Joseph CURRO, Plainfiff-Respondent, v. Louis A. MARINO, Defendant-Appellant, and Nicholas Di Menna & Son, Inc., Defendant.

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

July 6, 1961.

O. G. Gjertsen, New York City, for defendant-appellant.

L. Liner, New York City, for plaintiff-respondent.

Before BREITEL, J. P., and RABIN, VALENTE, McNALLY and STEVENS, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Order entered on November 4, 1960, granting defendant's motion to dismiss the complaint for failure to prosecute unless plaintiff serves and files a note of issue for the January 1961 Term of the Supreme Court, Bronx County, unanimously modified, on the facts and in the exercise of discretion, so as to dismiss the complaint unconditionally, with $10 costs, and, as so modified, affirmed with $20 costs and disbursements to appellant, and judgment directed to be entered in favor of defendant dismissing the complaint, with costs. The inactivity in this case for a period of over two years until new attorneys were substituted has not been sufficiently explained or excused....