Cramer v. Englert

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Cramer v. Englert

283 A.D.2d 871, 724 N.Y.S.2d 916, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5429

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

DecidedMay 24, 2001

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 283 A.D.2d 871 (Cramer v. Englert) 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

Cramer v. Englert, 283 A.D.2d 871, 724 N.Y.S.2d 916, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5429 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

—Carpinello, J.

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court (Teresi, J.), entered December 6, 2000 in Albany County, which settled the record on appeal.

Plaintiff contends that Supreme Court erred in excluding certain pages from the record on appeal. Inasmuch as pages 325 through 334 of the record prepared by plaintiff were neither submitted to the court on any pretrial motion nor offered as exhibits at trial, Supreme Court did not err in excluding them from the record on appeal (see, De Cotis v Malinoski, 252 [872]*872AD2d 646). With regard to pages 358 through 389, however, it appears that they were submitted to the court on the pretrial motions for summary judgment. Although Supreme Court’s order deciding those motions was the subject of an earlier appeal (262 AD2d 827), the documents may have some relevance to the preclusion order that remains subject to review on plaintiffs appeal from the judgment entered on the jury verdict in favor of defendants.

Cardona, P. J., Her cure, Peters and Spain, JJ., concur. Ordered that the order is modified, on the law, without costs, by reversing so much thereof as directed that pages 358 through 389 be stricken from the record on appeal and, as so modified, affirmed.

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

—Carpinello, J.

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court (Teresi, J.), entered December 6, 2000 in Albany County, which settled the record on appeal.

Plaintiff contends that Supreme Court erred in excluding certain pages from the record on appeal. Inasmuch as pages 325 through 334 of the record prepared by plaintiff were neither submitted to the court on any pretrial motion nor offered as exhibits at trial, Supreme Court did not err in excluding them from the record on appeal (see, De Cotis v Malinoski, 252 [872]*872AD2d 646). With regard to pages 358 through 389, however, it appears that they were submitted to the court on the pretrial motions for summary judgment. Although Supreme Court’s order deciding those motions was the subject of an earlier appeal (262 AD2d 827), the documents may have some relevance to the preclusion order that remains subject to review on plaintiffs appeal from the judgment entered on the jury verdict in favor of defendants.

Cardona, P. J., Her cure, Peters and Spain, JJ., concur. Ordered that the order is modified, on the law, without costs, by reversing so much thereof as directed that pages 358 through 389 be stricken from the record on appeal and, as so modified, affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

283 A.D.2d 871, 724 N.Y.S.2d 916, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5429, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cramer-v-englert-nyappdiv-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack