A. D. Silver v. Tucks Enterprises Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

A. D. Silver v. Tucks Enterprises Inc.

65 A.D.2d 591, 409 N.Y.S.2d 259, 1978 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13256

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedOctober 16, 1978

StatusPublished

This text of 65 A.D.2d 591 (A. D. Silver v. Tucks Enterprises Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

A. D. Silver v. Tucks Enterprises Inc., 65 A.D.2d 591, 409 N.Y.S.2d 259, 1978 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13256 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1978).

Pincite

Opinion

In a mortgage foreclosure action, the appeal, as limited by the appellants’ brief, is from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Rockland County, entered December 6, 1977, as granted that part of the plaintiffs motion that requested leave to serve an amended summons and complaint. Order reversed, insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements and that part of the motion requesting leave to serve an amended summons and complaint is denied without prejudice to renew after a legal representative has been appointed to safeguard the interests of the estate of Marie Martello, now deceased. The record reveals that Marie Martello died before the notice of motion was served, that the fact of her death was known to plaintiffs attorney at that time, and that no representative had been substituted. Accordingly, leave to serve an amended summons and complaint should not have been granted. Shapiro, J. P., Cohalan, Hawkins and O’Connor, JJ., concur.

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

In a mortgage foreclosure action, the appeal, as limited by the appellants’ brief, is from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Rockland County, entered December 6, 1977, as granted that part of the plaintiffs motion that requested leave to serve an amended summons and complaint. Order reversed, insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements and that part of the motion requesting leave to serve an amended summons and complaint is denied without prejudice to renew after a legal representative has been appointed to safeguard the interests of the estate of Marie Martello, now deceased. The record reveals that Marie Martello died before the notice of motion was served, that the fact of her death was known to plaintiffs attorney at that time, and that no representative had been substituted. Accordingly, leave to serve an amended summons and complaint should not have been granted. Shapiro, J. P., Cohalan, Hawkins and O’Connor, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

65 A.D.2d 591, 409 N.Y.S.2d 259, 1978 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13256, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/a-d-silver-v-tucks-enterprises-inc-nyappdiv-1978.