Opinion · Nylaw New York

FARBER v. BROADCO HOLDING CORPORATION, 256 App. Div. 833 (1939)

256 App. Div. 833

Type: Opinion
Court: Nylaw New York
Jurisdiction: Nylaw
Date: 1939-01-23
Topic: general

FARBER v. BROADCO HOLDING CORPORATION, 256 App. Div. 833 (1939) FRANCES FARBER, Respondent, v. BROADCO HOLDING CORPORATION, Appellant.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department. January 23, 1939.

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed FARBER v. BROADCO HOLDING CORPORATION, 256 App. Div. 833 (1939). The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

FARBER v. BROADCO HOLDING CORPORATION,256 App. Div. 833(1939)

FRANCES FARBER, Respondent, v. BROADCO HOLDING CORPORATION, Appellant.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department.

January 23, 1939.

Order denying, conditionally, defendant's motion to dismiss the complaint for failure to prosecute reversed on the law and the facts, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion granted, without costs. The delay of well over two years after joinder of issue, during which time the cause of action was not noticed for trial, with no reasonable excuse offered for the delay, requires dismissal. Lazansky, P.J., Hagarty, Davis, Adel and Taylor, JJ., concur.