Hyperlawhypertext legal databasebeta Premo v. Cornell 55 N.Y.2d 962

← Cases

Premo v. Cornell

55 N.Y.2d 962 Court N.Y. Decision date 1982-02-16 English

Contents

Majority

p. 962
Chloe Premo, Appellant, v Donald Cornell et al., Respondents.
Decided Feburary 16, 1982
p. 964
APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL
Robert G. Main, Jr., for appellant.
James P. Bessette for respondents.

OPINION OF THE COURT

On review of submissions pursuant to rule 500.2 (b) of the Rule of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.2 [b]), order affirmed, with costs. It cannot be said, as a matter of law, that the Appellate Division abused its discretion in granting defendants’ motion to dismiss the action pursuant to CPLR 3012 (subd [b]). Indeed, as we held in Barasch v Micucci ( 49 NY2d 594 , 600-601), it would have been an abuse of discretion to have failed to dismiss.

Concur: Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Meyer.

Cases cited