Mura v. GordonMura v. Gordon
—In an action to recover damages for medical malpractice, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, (Roberto, Jr., J.), dated November 21, 1997, which, upon the denial of the plaintiffs’ application at trial for a continuance and the granting of the defendant’s cross application to dismiss the complaint, dismissed the complaint.
Ordered that the judgment is reversed, with costs, the application is granted, the cross application is denied, and the complaint is reinstated.
Although an application for a continuance is addressed to the sound discretion of the trial court, it is an improvident exercise of discretion to deny a continuance where the application is properly made, is not made for the purpose of delay, the evidence is material, and the need for a continuance did not result from the failure to exercise due diligence (see, Evangelinos v Reifschneider,