Davis v. Waidmann Realty Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Davis v. Waidmann Realty Corp.

223 A.D.2d 453, 637 N.Y.S.2d 14, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 487

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

DecidedJanuary 23, 1996

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 223 A.D.2d 453 (Davis v. Waidmann Realty Corp.) 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

Davis v. Waidmann Realty Corp., 223 A.D.2d 453, 637 N.Y.S.2d 14, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 487 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Joan Lobis, J.), entered August 12,1994, which granted renewal of plaintiff’s prior motion for amendment of a judgment to include interest, and, on renewal, granted the motion, and directed the County Clerk to change the judgment to add interest for the period from the date the order was issued by the Division of Housing and Community Renewal until the final judgment was docketed, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The judgment was properly amended (see, Kiker v Nassau County, 85 NY2d 879). While defendant contends that CPLR 5002 does not permit pre-judgment interest on an amount awarded pursuant to an order of the Division of Housing and Community Renewal, this Court has already ruled to the contrary (Abend v Argo Corp., 208 AD2d 476, lv denied 85 NY2d 882). We have considered defendant’s remaining arguments, and find them to be without merit. Concur—Ellerin, J. P., Kupferman, Ross, Williams and Tom, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Joan Lobis, J.), entered August 12,1994, which granted renewal of plaintiff’s prior motion for amendment of a judgment to include interest, and, on renewal, granted the motion, and directed the County Clerk to change the judgment to add interest for the period from the date the order was issued by the Division of Housing and Community Renewal until the final judgment was docketed, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The judgment was properly amended (see, Kiker v Nassau County, 85 NY2d 879). While defendant contends that CPLR 5002 does not permit pre-judgment interest on an amount awarded pursuant to an order of the Division of Housing and Community Renewal, this Court has already ruled to the contrary (Abend v Argo Corp., 208 AD2d 476, lv denied 85 NY2d 882). We have considered defendant’s remaining arguments, and find them to be without merit. Concur—Ellerin, J. P., Kupferman, Ross, Williams and Tom, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

223 A.D.2d 453, 637 N.Y.S.2d 14, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 487, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/davis-v-waidmann-realty-corp-nyappdiv-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack