Glavan v. OMI Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Glavan v. OMI Corp.

249 A.D.2d 42, 670 N.Y.S.2d 771, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3792

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

DecidedApril 7, 1998

StatusPublished

This text of 249 A.D.2d 42 (Glavan v. OMI Corp.) 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

Glavan v. OMI Corp., 249 A.D.2d 42, 670 N.Y.S.2d 771, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3792 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Richard Braun, J.), entered on or about February 8, ,1996, which, during trial, dismissed the complaint and the third-party complaint, unanimously affirmed, with costs. Appeal from order, same court (Karla Moskowitz, J.), entered on or about December 1, 1995, which precluded plaintiff from presenting psychiatric evidence at trial, unanimously dismissed, without costs, as moot.

Plaintiff’s various claims were properly dismissed upon the basis of his representation at trial that he was not proceeding on certain claims, his earlier withdrawal with prejudice of anothér claim, and prior orders dismissing the remaining claims (see, Public Adm’r of County of N. Y. v Frota Oceanica Brasileira, 222 AD2d 332, lv dismissed 88 NY2d 920; Ford Motor Credit Co. v Colonial Funding Corp., 215 AD2d 435, 436; see also, Siegel, NY Prac § 448, at 679-680 [2d ed]). Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Rosenberger, Williams and Andrias, JJ.

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

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Richard Braun, J.), entered on or about February 8, ,1996, which, during trial, dismissed the complaint and the third-party complaint, unanimously affirmed, with costs. Appeal from order, same court (Karla Moskowitz, J.), entered on or about December 1, 1995, which precluded plaintiff from presenting psychiatric evidence at trial, unanimously dismissed, without costs, as moot.

Plaintiff’s various claims were properly dismissed upon the basis of his representation at trial that he was not proceeding on certain claims, his earlier withdrawal with prejudice of anothér claim, and prior orders dismissing the remaining claims (see, Public Adm’r of County of N. Y. v Frota Oceanica Brasileira, 222 AD2d 332, lv dismissed 88 NY2d 920; Ford Motor Credit Co. v Colonial Funding Corp., 215 AD2d 435, 436; see also, Siegel, NY Prac § 448, at 679-680 [2d ed]). Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Rosenberger, Williams and Andrias, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

249 A.D.2d 42, 670 N.Y.S.2d 771, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3792, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/glavan-v-omi-corp-nyappdiv-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack