Chen v. Nassimi

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Chen v. Nassimi

236 A.D.2d 230, 654 N.Y.S.2d 284, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 897

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

DecidedFebruary 6, 1997

StatusPublished

This text of 236 A.D.2d 230 (Chen v. Nassimi) 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

Chen v. Nassimi, 236 A.D.2d 230, 654 N.Y.S.2d 284, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 897 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal from order, Supreme Court, New York County (Edward Lehner, J.), entered May 10, 1995, which denied plaintiffs motion to renew and reargue plaintiffs motion to vacate a stipulation of discontinuance, unanimously dismissed, without costs.

Since plaintiffs motion was, in essence, a motion for reargument only, the order denying the motion is nonappealable (Amankwa v New York City Hous. Auth, 224 AD2d 262). Were we not dismissing this appeal, we would affirm. To the extent that plaintiffs motion could be deemed a motion to renew, we agree with the court that plaintiff failed to offer a valid excuse for not submitting the deposition transcript, which was submitted in lieu of an affidavit of merit, on the original motion (see, Mangine v Keller, 182 AD2d 476). Concur—Wallach, J. P., Nardelli, Williams and Tom, JJ.

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

—Appeal from order, Supreme Court, New York County (Edward Lehner, J.), entered May 10, 1995, which denied plaintiffs motion to renew and reargue plaintiffs motion to vacate a stipulation of discontinuance, unanimously dismissed, without costs.

Since plaintiffs motion was, in essence, a motion for reargument only, the order denying the motion is nonappealable (Amankwa v New York City Hous. Auth, 224 AD2d 262). Were we not dismissing this appeal, we would affirm. To the extent that plaintiffs motion could be deemed a motion to renew, we agree with the court that plaintiff failed to offer a valid excuse for not submitting the deposition transcript, which was submitted in lieu of an affidavit of merit, on the original motion (see, Mangine v Keller, 182 AD2d 476). Concur—Wallach, J. P., Nardelli, Williams and Tom, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

236 A.D.2d 230, 654 N.Y.S.2d 284, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 897, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/chen-v-nassimi-nyappdiv-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack