Di Novi v. Porciello

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Di Novi v. Porciello

214 A.D.2d 600, 624 N.Y.S.2d 961, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4092

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

DecidedApril 10, 1995

StatusPublished

This text of 214 A.D.2d 600 (Di Novi v. Porciello) 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

Di Novi v. Porciello, 214 A.D.2d 600, 624 N.Y.S.2d 961, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4092 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action pursuant to RPAPL 901 seeking the partition and sale of certain real property, the defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme [601]*601Court, Queens County (Smith, J.), dated September 26, 1991, which denied their motion for renewal of the plaintiffs’ previous motion for summary judgment.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

Contrary to the defendants’ contentions, we conclude that the documents submitted by the plaintiffs provided a sufficient basis for a court-appointed Referee to substantially comply with an order directing him to perform an accounting with regard to the income generated and expenditures incurred by the subject property (see, e.g., Matter of Skuse v Town of S. Bristol, 99 AD2d 670). Sullivan, J. P., Miller, Copertino, Joy and Friedmann, JJ., concur.

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

In an action pursuant to RPAPL 901 seeking the partition and sale of certain real property, the defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme [601]*601Court, Queens County (Smith, J.), dated September 26, 1991, which denied their motion for renewal of the plaintiffs’ previous motion for summary judgment.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

Contrary to the defendants’ contentions, we conclude that the documents submitted by the plaintiffs provided a sufficient basis for a court-appointed Referee to substantially comply with an order directing him to perform an accounting with regard to the income generated and expenditures incurred by the subject property (see, e.g., Matter of Skuse v Town of S. Bristol, 99 AD2d 670). Sullivan, J. P., Miller, Copertino, Joy and Friedmann, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

214 A.D.2d 600, 624 N.Y.S.2d 961, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4092, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/di-novi-v-porciello-nyappdiv-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack