Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
Contrary to the plaintiff's contention, the Supreme Court did not err in denying his motion to vacate the order dated March 5, 1987, which dismissed the complaint based upon his failure to appear, as directed, at a scheduled examination before trial and upon the failure of his counsel to appear at a pretrial status conference scheduled to be held before a Justice of the Supreme Court. The plaintiff's moving papers failed...
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.
