The action was commenced in 1960 and involves transactions occurring in 1957 and 1958. Plaintiff-respondent's attorney advances no reason for his failure to move to vacate the order of preclusion until May 23, 1962, which was eight months after he learned of it and seven months after his substitution. (Cf. Paris v. Poticha,
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
- Updated daily.
- Uncompromising quality.
- Complete, Accurate, Current.