Bartal v. Bartal
This text of 97 A.D.2d 451 (Bartal v. Bartal) 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.
Opinion
In a matrimonial action, plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Rockland County (Walsh, J.), entered May 23, 1983, which denied her motion to, in effect, reargue a prior motion for pendente lite relief. Appeal dismissed, without costs or disbursements. No appeal lies from an order denying reargument (Frankel v Frankel, 67 AD2d 719). Although plaintiff denominated her motion as one seeking renewal and reargument, no new facts were presented. Titone, J. P., Lazer, Thompson and Boyers, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
97 A.D.2d 451, 467 N.Y.S.2d 416, 1983 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 20040, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bartal-v-bartal-nyappdiv-1983.