433 Sutton Corp. v. Broder

New York Court of Appeals

433 Sutton Corp. v. Broder

7 N.E.3d 1124, 22 N.Y.3d 1161

CourtNew York Court of Appeals

DecidedApril 1, 2014

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 7 N.E.3d 1124 (433 Sutton Corp. v. Broder) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

433 Sutton Corp. v. Broder, 7 N.E.3d 1124, 22 N.Y.3d 1161 (N.Y. 2014).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.11 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.11), order reversed, with costs, order of Supreme Court, New York County, reinstated, and certified question answered in the negative. The Appellate Division erred in determining that defendant was the prevailing party. Accordingly, defendant is not entitled to attorneys’ fees.

Concur: Chief Judge Lippman and Judges Graffeo, Read, Smith, Pigott, Rivera and Abdus-Salaam.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

OPINION OF THE COURT

On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.11 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.11), order reversed, with costs, order of Supreme Court, New York County, reinstated, and certified question answered in the negative. The Appellate Division erred in determining that defendant was the prevailing party. Accordingly, defendant is not entitled to attorneys’ fees.

Concur: Chief Judge Lippman and Judges Graffeo, Read, Smith, Pigott, Rivera and Abdus-Salaam.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

7 N.E.3d 1124, 22 N.Y.3d 1161, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/433-sutton-corp-v-broder-ny-2014.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack