Gold-Land, Inc. v. Haskell

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Gold-Land, Inc. v. Haskell

248 A.D.2d 132, 669 N.Y.S.2d 804, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1911

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

DecidedMarch 3, 1998

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 248 A.D.2d 132 (Gold-Land, Inc. v. Haskell) 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

Gold-Land, Inc. v. Haskell, 248 A.D.2d 132, 669 N.Y.S.2d 804, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1911 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Harold Tompkins, J.), entered on or about August 11, 1997, which, in an action by plaintiff commercial tenant for a declaration that it is not in violation of its lease with defendant landlord, implicitly denied plaintiffs motion for Yellowstone relief and sua sponte transferred the action to Civil Court pursuant to CPLR 325 (d), unanimously modified, on the law, the transfer vacated, and the complaint dismissed, without prejudice to plaintiff commencing an action in Civil Court, and the order otherwise affirmed, without costs. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment accordingly.

The IAS Court’s implicit denial of plaintiffs motion for a Yellowstone injunction was proper, but, upon reaching that determination, it should have dismissed the action. CPLR 325 (d) was not a proper vehicle for transferring this action to Civil Court. The parties may raise any outstanding issues in the commercial landlord tenant part of Civil Court (Lun Far Co. v Aylesbury Assocs., 40 AD2d 794), if so advised. Concur — Milonas, J. P., Nardelli, Williams and Mazzarelli, JJ.

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

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Harold Tompkins, J.), entered on or about August 11, 1997, which, in an action by plaintiff commercial tenant for a declaration that it is not in violation of its lease with defendant landlord, implicitly denied plaintiffs motion for Yellowstone relief and sua sponte transferred the action to Civil Court pursuant to CPLR 325 (d), unanimously modified, on the law, the transfer vacated, and the complaint dismissed, without prejudice to plaintiff commencing an action in Civil Court, and the order otherwise affirmed, without costs. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment accordingly.

The IAS Court’s implicit denial of plaintiffs motion for a Yellowstone injunction was proper, but, upon reaching that determination, it should have dismissed the action. CPLR 325 (d) was not a proper vehicle for transferring this action to Civil Court. The parties may raise any outstanding issues in the commercial landlord tenant part of Civil Court (Lun Far Co. v Aylesbury Assocs., 40 AD2d 794), if so advised. Concur — Milonas, J. P., Nardelli, Williams and Mazzarelli, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

248 A.D.2d 132, 669 N.Y.S.2d 804, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1911, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gold-land-inc-v-haskell-nyappdiv-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack