Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Dale SHUMSKI, et al., respondents, v. David M. LOYA, etc., et al., defendants; Edwards Superstores, et al., nonparty-appellants.
In an action to recover damages for medical malpractice, etc., nonparties Edwards Superstores and First National Supermarkets appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Tanenbaum, J.), entered August 10, 2007, which granted the plaintiffs' motion pursuant to Workers' Compensation Law § 29(5) for judicial approval of the voluntary discontinuance of the action, nunc pro tunc.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.
A motion for judicial approval pursuant to Workers' Compensation Law § 29(5) is addressed to the sound discretion of the Supreme Court (see Matter of Reynar v. Village of Sloatsburg, 17 A.D.3d 601, 602, 792 N.Y.S.2d 870; Singh v. Ross, 12 A.D.3d 498, 785 N.Y.S.2d 464; Zamfino v. Furman, 1 A.D.3d 591, 592, 767 N.Y.S.2d 634; Matter of Banks v. National Union Ins. Co., 304 A.D.2d 573, 756 N.Y.S.2d 890). Here, the plaintiffs successfully demonstrated that their delay in seeking judicial approval of their discontinuance of this medical malpractice action was based on their good faith, reasonable belief that the carrier's consent to the discontinuance already had been obtained or was unnecessary under the circumstances (see generally Matter of Cosgrove v. County of Ulster, 51 A.D.3d 1326, 858 N.Y.S.2d 453; DeRosa v. Petrylak, 290 A.D.2d 596, 736 N.Y.S.2d 705; Matter of Stiffen v. CNA Ins. Cos., 282 A.D.2d 991, 723 N.Y.S.2d 569). Moreover, the plaintiffs established that the discontinuance of the action was reasonable given the complete lack of expert medical evidence to support it, and there is no discernible prejudice to the appellants as a result of the discontinuance (see e.g. Matter of Snyder v. CNA Ins. Cos., 25 A.D.3d 1055, 807 N.Y.S.2d 482). Accordingly, the Supreme Court providently exercised its broad discretion in approving the discontinuance (see generally Matter of Reynar v. Village of Sloatsburg, 17 A.D.3d 601, 792 N.Y.S.2d 870; Matter of Banks v. National Union Ins. Co., 304 A.D.2d 573, 756 N.Y.S.2d 890).
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: 13923 /01, 2007-08923
Decided: October 14, 2008
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)