Court Opinion

ID: 5921834
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-01-13 04:33:07.768454+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:46:25.410767
License: Public Domain

Aii examination of the record leads us to conclude that the Supreme Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in granting the plaintiff’s motion to substitute the executor of the estate of Fannie Criaris as a party plaintiff in place of Fannie Criaris and in allowing the late filing of a notice of medical malpractice action (see, Egrini v Brookhaven Mem. Hosp., 133 AD2d 610; Tewari v Tsoutsouras, 75 NY2d 1). Mangano, J. P., Kunzeman, Eiber and Hooper, JJ., concur.