E. F. Hutton & Co. v. Cuomo

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

E. F. Hutton & Co. v. Cuomo

73 A.D.2d 555, 423 N.Y.S.2d 446, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14325

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

DecidedDecember 18, 1979

StatusPublished

This text of 73 A.D.2d 555 (E. F. Hutton & Co. v. Cuomo) 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

E. F. Hutton & Co. v. Cuomo, 73 A.D.2d 555, 423 N.Y.S.2d 446, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14325 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1979).

Pincite

Opinion

— Order, Supreme Court, New York County, entered November 1, 1978, which, inter alia, denied plaintiffs motion to consolidate an action pending in Queens County with the instant action, unanimously modified, on the law and in the exercise of justice, without costs or disbursements, to the extent of ordering a joint trial of the within action, as already consolidated, with the Queens action, with the trial to be held in Queens County, and except, as thus modified, affirmed. While, as Special Term correctly held, this is not a matter for consolidation with the conversion action pending in Queens County, we are of the view that the issues involved in both actions are ideally suited for resolution at a joint trial and exercise our discretion accordingly. (See Roseman v Weisman, 36 AD2d 587; Padilla v Greyhound Lines, 29 AD2d 495.) Settle order. Concur — Murphy, P. J., Kupferman, Birns, Sandler and Sullivan, JJ.

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

— Order, Supreme Court, New York County, entered November 1, 1978, which, inter alia, denied plaintiffs motion to consolidate an action pending in Queens County with the instant action, unanimously modified, on the law and in the exercise of justice, without costs or disbursements, to the extent of ordering a joint trial of the within action, as already consolidated, with the Queens action, with the trial to be held in Queens County, and except, as thus modified, affirmed. While, as Special Term correctly held, this is not a matter for consolidation with the conversion action pending in Queens County, we are of the view that the issues involved in both actions are ideally suited for resolution at a joint trial and exercise our discretion accordingly. (See Roseman v Weisman, 36 AD2d 587; Padilla v Greyhound Lines, 29 AD2d 495.) Settle order. Concur — Murphy, P. J., Kupferman, Birns, Sandler and Sullivan, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

73 A.D.2d 555, 423 N.Y.S.2d 446, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14325, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/e-f-hutton-co-v-cuomo-nyappdiv-1979.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack