Flisfeder v. Jardine

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Flisfeder v. Jardine

300 A.D.2d 1132, 751 N.Y.S.2d 890

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

DecidedDecember 30, 2002

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 300 A.D.2d 1132 (Flisfeder v. Jardine) 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

Flisfeder v. Jardine, 300 A.D.2d 1132, 751 N.Y.S.2d 890 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal from that part of an order of Supreme Court, Monroe County (Polito, J.), entered September 18, 2001, that granted plaintiffs motion for summary judgment in lieu of a complaint.

It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed without costs.

Memorandum: We affirm for reasons stated at Supreme Court, Monroe County (Polito, J.). We add only that we reject defendant’s contention that “the cause of action on which the [foreign country] judgment is based is repugnant to the public policy of this state” (CPLR 5304 [b] [4]). CPLR 5304 (b) (4) may not be invoked “unless enforcement [of such judgment] would result in the recognition of a ‘transaction which is inherently vicious, wicked or immoral, and shocking to the prevailing moral sense’ ” (Greschler v Greschler, 51 NY2d 368, 377, quoting Intercontinental Hotels Corp. [Puerto Rico] v Golden, 15 NY2d 9, 13), and that cannot be said of the judgment at issue here. Present — Hayes, J.P., Wisner, Hurlbutt, Scudder and Gorski, JJ.

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

—Appeal from that part of an order of Supreme Court, Monroe County (Polito, J.), entered September 18, 2001, that granted plaintiffs motion for summary judgment in lieu of a complaint.

It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed without costs.

Memorandum: We affirm for reasons stated at Supreme Court, Monroe County (Polito, J.). We add only that we reject defendant’s contention that “the cause of action on which the [foreign country] judgment is based is repugnant to the public policy of this state” (CPLR 5304 [b] [4]). CPLR 5304 (b) (4) may not be invoked “unless enforcement [of such judgment] would result in the recognition of a ‘transaction which is inherently vicious, wicked or immoral, and shocking to the prevailing moral sense’ ” (Greschler v Greschler, 51 NY2d 368, 377, quoting Intercontinental Hotels Corp. [Puerto Rico] v Golden, 15 NY2d 9, 13), and that cannot be said of the judgment at issue here. Present — Hayes, J.P., Wisner, Hurlbutt, Scudder and Gorski, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

300 A.D.2d 1132, 751 N.Y.S.2d 890, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/flisfeder-v-jardine-nyappdiv-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack