Case Name: Gertrude Wright, Respondent, v. Centurion Investigations, Inc., et al., Appellants, et al., Defendants
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Term
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1982-01-07
Citations: 113 Misc. 2d 150
Docket Number: 
Parties: Gertrude Wright, Respondent, v Centurion Investigations, Inc., et al., Appellants, et al., Defendants.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York Miscellaneous Reports
Volume: 113
Pages: 150–151

Head Matter:
Gertrude Wright, Respondent, v Centurion Investigations, Inc., et al., Appellants, et al., Defendants.
Supreme Court, Appellate Term, Second Department,
January 7, 1982
APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL
Lester Schwab Katz & Dwyer (B. Jennifer Jaffee of counsel), for Centurion Investigations, Inc., appellant. Langan & Levy (Linda L. Larsen of counsel), for Coney Island Site Five Houses and another, appellants. F. V. Mina for Hampton Management, Inc., appellant. McLaughlin, McLaughlin & Niemark (Harold J. McLaughlin of counsel), for respondent.

Opinion:
OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
Order insofar as appealed from reversed, without costs, and motion denied.
The plaintiff's consent was not necessary in order for the defendants to withdraw their demand for a jury trial (CPLR 4102, subds [a], [c]; 4 Weinstein-Korn-Miller, NY Civ Prac, pars 4102.05, 4102.15,4102.18). We incidentally note that under the facts herein the plaintiff was not entitled to file a jury demand nunc pro tune pursuant to CPLR 4102 (subd [e]) (see Fils v Diener, 59 AD2d 522; see, also, Brigando v Grumman Aerospace Corp., 78 AD2d 865).