Curcio v. Dillon

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Curcio v. Dillon

253 A.D.2d 504, 676 N.Y.S.2d 868, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8954

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

DecidedAugust 18, 1998

StatusPublished

This text of 253 A.D.2d 504 (Curcio v. Dillon) 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

Curcio v. Dillon, 253 A.D.2d 504, 676 N.Y.S.2d 868, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8954 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

In a [505]*505proceeding pursuant to Election Law §§ 2-110, 2-124, and 16-104, inter alia, to enjoin the appellants from “employing the name ‘Conservative Party’ ”, the appeal is from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Gowan, J.), dated June 29, 1998, which granted the petition to the extent of enjoining “the Liberty Conservative Club of Brookhaven * * * from using the term ‘ [Conservative’ in the title of their organization” unless they complied with certain conditions.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

On the record before us and considering the facts and circumstances of this case, we conclude that the judgment appealed from should be affirmed (see, Matter of Kelly v Curcio, 180 AD2d 737, 738).

The Supreme Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in granting the petitioner’s motion to disqualify the attorney for the appellant George Lessler (see, Tekni-Plex, Inc. v Meyner & Landis, 89 NY2d 123). Rosenblatt, J. P., Miller, Ritter and Sullivan, JJ., concur.

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

In a [505]*505proceeding pursuant to Election Law §§ 2-110, 2-124, and 16-104, inter alia, to enjoin the appellants from “employing the name ‘Conservative Party’ ”, the appeal is from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Gowan, J.), dated June 29, 1998, which granted the petition to the extent of enjoining “the Liberty Conservative Club of Brookhaven * * * from using the term ‘ [Conservative’ in the title of their organization” unless they complied with certain conditions.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

On the record before us and considering the facts and circumstances of this case, we conclude that the judgment appealed from should be affirmed (see, Matter of Kelly v Curcio, 180 AD2d 737, 738).

The Supreme Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in granting the petitioner’s motion to disqualify the attorney for the appellant George Lessler (see, Tekni-Plex, Inc. v Meyner & Landis, 89 NY2d 123). Rosenblatt, J. P., Miller, Ritter and Sullivan, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

253 A.D.2d 504, 676 N.Y.S.2d 868, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8954, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/curcio-v-dillon-nyappdiv-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack