Globe Capital Corp. v. East Coast Construction Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Globe Capital Corp. v. East Coast Construction Corp.

24 A.D.2d 725, 263 N.Y.S.2d 437, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3357

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

DecidedSeptember 29, 1965

StatusPublished

This text of 24 A.D.2d 725 (Globe Capital Corp. v. East Coast Construction 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

Globe Capital Corp. v. East Coast Construction Corp., 24 A.D.2d 725, 263 N.Y.S.2d 437, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3357 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1965).

Pincite

Opinion

—In two actions, in each of which plaintiffs seek to foreclose a separate mortgage on the same property, and in each of which the defendants East Coast Construction Corp. and David Mandelbaum interposed a counterclaim to recover damages for alleged overpayments, the plaintiffs appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Rockland County, entered May 5, 1965, as denied their motion to discontinue the actions. Order, insofar as appealed from, reversed, without costs; plaintiffs’ motion to discontinue the actions granted; and counterclaims severed. During the pendency of these foreclosure actions, defendants, East Coast Construction Corp. and Mandelbaum, paid plaintiffs’ claims in full. The counterclaim in each action is to recover damages for alleged overpayments. Under the circumstances, it is our opinion that the denial of plaintiffs’ motion to discontinue the actions was an improvident exercise of discretion. Beldock, P. J., Ughetta, Christ, Brennan and Hill, JJ., concur.

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

—In two actions, in each of which plaintiffs seek to foreclose a separate mortgage on the same property, and in each of which the defendants East Coast Construction Corp. and David Mandelbaum interposed a counterclaim to recover damages for alleged overpayments, the plaintiffs appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Rockland County, entered May 5, 1965, as denied their motion to discontinue the actions. Order, insofar as appealed from, reversed, without costs; plaintiffs’ motion to discontinue the actions granted; and counterclaims severed. During the pendency of these foreclosure actions, defendants, East Coast Construction Corp. and Mandelbaum, paid plaintiffs’ claims in full. The counterclaim in each action is to recover damages for alleged overpayments. Under the circumstances, it is our opinion that the denial of plaintiffs’ motion to discontinue the actions was an improvident exercise of discretion. Beldock, P. J., Ughetta, Christ, Brennan and Hill, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

24 A.D.2d 725, 263 N.Y.S.2d 437, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3357, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/globe-capital-corp-v-east-coast-construction-corp-nyappdiv-1965.