Cangro v. Maranzos

2018 NY Slip Op 2886
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedApril 26, 2018
Docket6374 101254/16
StatusPublished

This text of 2018 NY Slip Op 2886 (Cangro v. Maranzos) 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
Cangro v. Maranzos, 2018 NY Slip Op 2886 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2018).

Opinion

Cangro v Maranzos (2018 NY Slip Op 02886)
Cangro v Maranzos
2018 NY Slip Op 02886
Decided on April 26, 2018
Appellate Division, First Department
Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.
This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.


Decided on April 26, 2018
Renwick, J.P., Manzanet-Daniels, Tom, Andrias, Oing, JJ.

6374 101254/16

[*1]Jennifer Cangro, Plaintiff-Appellant,

v

John Z. Maranzos, Defendant-Respondent.


Jennifer Cangro, appellant pro se.



Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Arlene P. Bluth, J.), entered October 31, 2016, which denied plaintiff's motion for damages and sanctions against defendant, and dismissed the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs. Plaintiff is enjoined from commencing any further litigation relating to this matter without permission of the appropriate Administrative Judge. The Clerk of the Court is directed to accept no filings from plaintiff as to such matter without prior leave of the Court.

This action is yet another impermissible collateral attack by plaintiff on her divorce judgment, and was properly dismissed (see e.g. Cangro v Marangos, 132 AD3d 573 [1st Dept 2015], appeal dismissed 26 NY3d 1113 [2016]). Furthermore, plaintiff failed again to comply with prior orders requiring her to obtain written approval from the administrative judge before commencing an action arising from the matrimonial action (id.; see also Cangro v Cangro, 288 AD2d 417 [2d Dept 2001]).

We enjoin plaintiff from commencing further proceedings against defendant without prior judicial permission, in light of her history of frivolous and abusive litigation, including this meritless action.

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER

OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.

ENTERED: APRIL 26, 2018

CLERK



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

Related

Cangro v. Cangro
288 A.D.2d 417 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2001)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2018 NY Slip Op 2886, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cangro-v-maranzos-nyappdiv-2018.