Evans v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Evans v. City of New York

31 A.D.3d 698, 818 N.Y.S.2d 475

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

DecidedJuly 25, 2006

StatusPublished

This text of 31 A.D.3d 698 (Evans v. City of New York) 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

Evans v. City of New York, 31 A.D.3d 698, 818 N.Y.S.2d 475 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2006).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Solomon, J.), dated March 25, 2005, which denied his motion for leave to reargue the defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (8) insofar as asserted against the defendant Police Officer Carlos Brathwaite for lack of personal jurisdiction, which was granted in a prior order of the same court dated January 10, 2005.

Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, with costs.

The appeal must be dismissed because no appeal lies from an order denying a motion for leave to reargue (see Blamer v Singh, 20 AD3d 440, 441 [2005]; Meekins v Town of Riverhead, 20 AD3d 399 [2005]; Kahlke v Buscemi, 12 AD3d 488, 489 [2004]; Metropolitan Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co. v Sigue, 10 AD3d 680 [2004]). Krausman, J.P., Mastro, Spolzino and Covello, JJ., concur.

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

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Solomon, J.), dated March 25, 2005, which denied his motion for leave to reargue the defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (8) insofar as asserted against the defendant Police Officer Carlos Brathwaite for lack of personal jurisdiction, which was granted in a prior order of the same court dated January 10, 2005.

Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, with costs.

The appeal must be dismissed because no appeal lies from an order denying a motion for leave to reargue (see Blamer v Singh, 20 AD3d 440, 441 [2005]; Meekins v Town of Riverhead, 20 AD3d 399 [2005]; Kahlke v Buscemi, 12 AD3d 488, 489 [2004]; Metropolitan Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co. v Sigue, 10 AD3d 680 [2004]). Krausman, J.P., Mastro, Spolzino and Covello, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

31 A.D.3d 698, 818 N.Y.S.2d 475, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/evans-v-city-of-new-york-nyappdiv-2006.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack