Almeida v. Town of Eastchester

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Almeida v. Town of Eastchester

41 A.D.2d 735, 341 N.Y.S.2d 300, 1973 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4965

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

DecidedMarch 5, 1973

StatusPublished

This text of 41 A.D.2d 735 (Almeida v. Town of Eastchester) 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

Almeida v. Town of Eastchester, 41 A.D.2d 735, 341 N.Y.S.2d 300, 1973 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4965 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1973).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by plaintiff, as limited by his brief, (1) from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, dated October 3, 1972, as (a) granted separate cross motions by defendants Town of Eastchester and Village of Tuckahoe for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and severance of the action, as to them, and (b) did not grant plaintiff further disclosure from said defendants; (2) from a judgment of the same court entered November 30, 1972 in favor of said village upon said order; and (3) from a purported judgment of the same court claimed to have been entered October 17, 1972. Order affirmed insofar as appealed from and judgment entered November 30, 1972 affirmed. No opinion. Appeal from purported judgment claimed to have been entered October 17, 1972 dismissed. Neither the record nor the filed papers contain such a judgment. One bill of $20 costs and disbursements is awarded jointly to respondents against appellant Robert Almeida to cover all the appeals. Hopkins, Acting P. J., Gulotta, Christ, Brennan and Benjamin, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by plaintiff, as limited by his brief, (1) from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, dated October 3, 1972, as (a) granted separate cross motions by defendants Town of Eastchester and Village of Tuckahoe for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and severance of the action, as to them, and (b) did not grant plaintiff further disclosure from said defendants; (2) from a judgment of the same court entered November 30, 1972 in favor of said village upon said order; and (3) from a purported judgment of the same court claimed to have been entered October 17, 1972. Order affirmed insofar as appealed from and judgment entered November 30, 1972 affirmed. No opinion. Appeal from purported judgment claimed to have been entered October 17, 1972 dismissed. Neither the record nor the filed papers contain such a judgment. One bill of $20 costs and disbursements is awarded jointly to respondents against appellant Robert Almeida to cover all the appeals. Hopkins, Acting P. J., Gulotta, Christ, Brennan and Benjamin, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

41 A.D.2d 735, 341 N.Y.S.2d 300, 1973 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4965, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/almeida-v-town-of-eastchester-nyappdiv-1973.