Drasser v. STP Associates, LLC

90 A.D.3d 701, 934 N.Y.2d 317
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided December 13, 2011·Published·Cited by 7 cases

Opinion

The Supreme Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in transferring the instant action to the Justice who presided over a prior action involving many of the same parties for the same or similar relief (see Kramer, Levin, Nessen, Kamin [702] & Frankel v International 800 Telecom Corp., 190 AD2d 538, 539 [1993]; Cosmos Forms v Furst, 172 AD2d 403 [1991]).

The defendant established its prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law dismissing the complaint. It demonstrated that the notices it sent to the plaintiffs in September 2009 pursuant to Real Property Law § 233 (b) (6) (i) complied with the requirements of that statute. In opposition, the plaintiffs failed to raise a triable issue of fact (see Alvarez v Prospect Hosp., 68 NY2d 320, 324 [1986]). Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly granted the defendant’s cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

The plaintiffs’ remaining contentions are without merit. Rivera, J.P, Leventhal, Roman and Sgroi, JJ., concur.

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

Drasser v. STP Associates, LLC, 90 A.D.3d 701, 934 N.Y.2d 317 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2011).

90 A.D.3d 701 (Drasser v. STP Associates, LLC) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Svatovic v. Svatovic
2018 NY Slip Op 7932 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2018)
Pedote v. STP Associates, LLC
124 A.D.3d 856 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2015)
STP Associates, LLC v. Hess
45 Misc. 3d 31 (Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York, 2014)
Cadlerock Joint Venture, L.P. v. Evans-Tracey
115 A.D.3d 692 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2014)
HOPE Assoc. of Syosset LLC v. STP Associates LLC
37 Misc. 3d 490 (New York Supreme Court, 2012)