490 Ocean Associates v. Abrams

New York Court of Appeals

490 Ocean Associates v. Abrams

524 N.E.2d 420, 71 N.Y.2d 975, 529 N.Y.S.2d 66, 1988 N.Y. LEXIS 688

CourtNew York Court of Appeals

DecidedMay 3, 1988

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 524 N.E.2d 420 (490 Ocean Associates v. Abrams) 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

490 Ocean Associates v. Abrams, 524 N.E.2d 420, 71 N.Y.2d 975, 529 N.Y.S.2d 66, 1988 N.Y. LEXIS 688 (N.Y. 1988).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The appeal should be dismissed, without costs, because no motion to dismiss was made by the Attorney-General.

The issue presented for review on this appeal was rendered moot when defendant accepted plaintiffs proposed offering on October 31, 1986. Acceptance of the offering occurred before the trial court ruled, apparently in ignorance of that fact, and manifestly before the Appellate Division affirmed, without opinion, and granted plaintiff leave to appeal to this court. Notwithstanding defendant’s acceptance of the proposal, plaintiffs counsel neither advised this court of the resolution of its client’s dispute nor offered any reason or argument why we should apply an exception to the mootness doctrine and address the merits (see, Matter of Hearst Corp. v Clyne, 50 NY2d 707, 714-715).

Additionally we note, as we have previously (see, Babi[977]*977gian v Wachtler, 69 NY2d 1012; Matter of Pollock, 64 NY2d 1156, 1158), that this court and the appellate process are better served when an intermediate court that sees fit to grant leave to appeal in a particular case sets forth the reasons for the result it has reached. Had the Appellate Division done so here, it might indeed have discovered that the case was moot and realized that further appeal was pointless unless there were articulable reasons for excepting this case from the mootness doctrine.

Appeal dismissed, without costs, in a memorandum.

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

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The appeal should be dismissed, without costs, because no motion to dismiss was made by the Attorney-General.

The issue presented for review on this appeal was rendered moot when defendant accepted plaintiffs proposed offering on October 31, 1986. Acceptance of the offering occurred before the trial court ruled, apparently in ignorance of that fact, and manifestly before the Appellate Division affirmed, without opinion, and granted plaintiff leave to appeal to this court. Notwithstanding defendant’s acceptance of the proposal, plaintiffs counsel neither advised this court of the resolution of its client’s dispute nor offered any reason or argument why we should apply an exception to the mootness doctrine and address the merits (see, Matter of Hearst Corp. v Clyne, 50 NY2d 707, 714-715).

Additionally we note, as we have previously (see, Babi[977]*977gian v Wachtler, 69 NY2d 1012; Matter of Pollock, 64 NY2d 1156, 1158), that this court and the appellate process are better served when an intermediate court that sees fit to grant leave to appeal in a particular case sets forth the reasons for the result it has reached. Had the Appellate Division done so here, it might indeed have discovered that the case was moot and realized that further appeal was pointless unless there were articulable reasons for excepting this case from the mootness doctrine.

Appeal dismissed, without costs, in a memorandum.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

524 N.E.2d 420, 71 N.Y.2d 975, 529 N.Y.S.2d 66, 1988 N.Y. LEXIS 688, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/490-ocean-associates-v-abrams-ny-1988.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack