Cardenas v. Bridges
This text of 2026 NY Slip Op 50168(U) (Cardenas v. Bridges) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
| Cardenas v Bridges |
| 2026 NY Slip Op 50168(U) |
| Decided on February 18, 2026 |
| Appellate Term, First Department |
| Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. |
| This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports. |
Decided on February 18, 2026
SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE TERM, FIRST DEPARTMENT
PRESENT: James, P.J., Brigantti, Alpert, JJ.
571672/25
against
Keith Bridges and Brenda Bridges, Defendants-Respondents.
Plaintiff appeals from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, New York County (Jose A. Padilla, Jr., J.), entered August 22, 2025, which denied his motions to, among other things, amend the complaint and to reopen the case.
Per Curiam.
Order (Jose A. Padilla, Jr., J.), entered August 22, 2025, affirmed, with $10 costs.
Civil Court properly denied plaintiff's motions seeking various relief. This action was previously terminated by a so-ordered stipulation of discontinuance executed by the parties (see Lazare v Pfizer, Inc., 257 AD2d 498 [1999], lv dismissed 93 NY2d 1000 [1999]). A court lacks jurisdiction to entertain a motion after the action has been unequivocally terminated by the execution of "an express, unconditional stipulation of discontinuance" (Teitelbaum Holdings v Gold, 48 NY2d 51, 56 [1979]).
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.
I concur I concur I concur
Decision Date: February 18, 2026
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
2026 NY Slip Op 50168(U), Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cardenas-v-bridges-nyappterm-2026.