Brause Realty, Inc. v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Brause Realty, Inc. v. City of New York

67 A.D.2d 880, 413 N.Y.S.2d 886, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10623

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

DecidedFebruary 22, 1979

StatusPublished

This text of 67 A.D.2d 880 (Brause Realty, Inc. v. City of New York) 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

Brause Realty, Inc. v. City of New York, 67 A.D.2d 880, 413 N.Y.S.2d 886, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10623 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1979).

Pincite

Opinion

— Order, Supreme Court, New York County, entered May 15, 1978, unanimously reversed, in the exercise of discretion, and plaintiffs-appellants’ motion for permission to serve and file a supplemental complaint, to increase the ad damnum clause, and to transfer the case from Civil to Supreme Court granted, without costs and without disbursements. This, of course, is not a motion for summary judgment, and sufficient has been demonstrated at least prima facie in the exhibits found with the motion papers to indicate a causal relationship with defendant-respondent’s alleged negligence in maintenance of its water lines, claimed to have been the cause of the damage stated in the original complaint. Concur — Lane, J. P., Markewich, Lupiano and Bloom, JJ.

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

— Order, Supreme Court, New York County, entered May 15, 1978, unanimously reversed, in the exercise of discretion, and plaintiffs-appellants’ motion for permission to serve and file a supplemental complaint, to increase the ad damnum clause, and to transfer the case from Civil to Supreme Court granted, without costs and without disbursements. This, of course, is not a motion for summary judgment, and sufficient has been demonstrated at least prima facie in the exhibits found with the motion papers to indicate a causal relationship with defendant-respondent’s alleged negligence in maintenance of its water lines, claimed to have been the cause of the damage stated in the original complaint. Concur — Lane, J. P., Markewich, Lupiano and Bloom, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

67 A.D.2d 880, 413 N.Y.S.2d 886, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10623, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/brause-realty-inc-v-city-of-new-york-nyappdiv-1979.