You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

Manko v. Lenox Hill Hospital

Citations: 118 A.D.3d 677; 986 N.Y.S.2d 859

Court: Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York; June 4, 2014; New York; State Appellate Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

In a medical malpractice action, the plaintiff appeals a January 22, 2009, order from the Supreme Court in Kings County, which denied her request for reimbursement of $5,300 in costs from her former attorney, despite recognizing her pro se status and deeming her notice of action timely. The appellate court, on June 30, 2010, held the plaintiff's motion for leave to appeal in abeyance, pending further argument or submission. After reviewing the submitted papers, the court denied the motion for leave to appeal and dismissed the appeal taken as of right, with no costs or disbursements awarded. The decision was concurred by Justices Dickerson, Austin, Roman, and Hinds-Radix.

Legal Issues Addressed

Appellate Procedure for Leave to Appeal

Application: The appellate court held the plaintiff's motion for leave to appeal in abeyance pending further argument or submission, ultimately denying the motion and dismissing the appeal taken as of right.

Reasoning: The appellate court, on June 30, 2010, held the plaintiff's motion for leave to appeal in abeyance, pending further argument or submission. After reviewing the submitted papers, the court denied the motion for leave to appeal and dismissed the appeal taken as of right, with no costs or disbursements awarded.

Reimbursement of Costs in Pro Se Representation

Application: The court addressed the plaintiff's request for reimbursement of $5,300 in costs from her former attorney, acknowledging her pro se status but ultimately denying the request.

Reasoning: In a medical malpractice action, the plaintiff appeals a January 22, 2009, order from the Supreme Court in Kings County, which denied her request for reimbursement of $5,300 in costs from her former attorney, despite recognizing her pro se status and deeming her notice of action timely.