Beekman Paper Co. v. Fingerhood

163 A.D.2d 238, 559 N.Y.S.2d 638, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8531
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJuly 17, 1990
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 163 A.D.2d 238 (Beekman Paper Co. v. Fingerhood) 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
Beekman Paper Co. v. Fingerhood, 163 A.D.2d 238, 559 N.Y.S.2d 638, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8531 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1990).

Opinion

Application pursuant to CPLR article 78 for a writ of mandamus is granted to the extent of directing respondent to entertain and decide petitioner’s motion in writing, without costs or disbursements.

[239]*239Petitioner is entitled to have its motion considered by the court and a decision rendered thereon in writing (Matter of Grisi v Shainswit, 119 AD2d 418). In that regard, even if petitioner’s motion is procedurally defective, as respondent contends, the court is still required to state in writing the reason for its denial; a motion submitted on papers may not be summarily rejected. Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Carro, Milonas, Asch and Wallach, JJ.

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

Related

Charalabidis v. Elnagar
2020 NY Slip Op 04913 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2020)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
163 A.D.2d 238, 559 N.Y.S.2d 638, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8531, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/beekman-paper-co-v-fingerhood-nyappdiv-1990.