The motion court properly exercised its discretion in denying Gandhi's motion for a severance since the actions involve common factual and legal issues and judicial economy would be served by trying them together, the court afforded Gandhi an adequate opportunity to complete discovery, and Gandhi has not otherwise demonstrated prejudice due to its having been impleaded at the "eleventh-hour" (see e.g. Rothstein v Milleridge
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Let's get started
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
WILSON v. CITY OF NEW YORK
1 A.D.3d 157 (2003)
766 N.Y.S.2d 841
CORINNE WILSON, Plaintiff, v. CITY OF NEW YORK et al., Defendants. (And a Third-Party Action.) EDENWALD CONTRACTING CO., INC., Second Third-Party Plaintiff-Respondent, v. GANDHI ENGINEERING, P.C., Second Third-Party Defendant-Appellant.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, First Department.https://leagle.com/images/logo.png
November 13, 2003.
November 13, 2003.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, First Department.
Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.
Cited Cases
- No Cases Found
Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.
