Golden v. Moscowitz

194 A.D.2d 385, 598 N.Y.S.2d 522
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJune 10, 1993
StatusPublished
Cited by12 cases

This text of 194 A.D.2d 385 (Golden v. Moscowitz) 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
Golden v. Moscowitz, 194 A.D.2d 385, 598 N.Y.S.2d 522 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1993).

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (C. Beauchamp Ciparick, J.), entered on or about November 12, 1992, which denied defendants’ motion to stay the action pending conclusion of the bankruptcy proceedings against defendant Multigas Distributors, Ltd. and granted plaintiff’s cross motion to sever Multigas from the action, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

"Appellate courts in this State have repeatedly held that a bankruptcy stay does not prevent a plaintiff from proceeding on causes of action against nonbankrupt defendants, which do not involve the bankrupt’s property” (CenTrust Servs. v Guterman, 160 AD2d 416, 418; see also, King v Northway Agencies, 127 AD2d 955; Lottes v Slater, 114 AD2d 580). Here, the [386]*386guarantees of the contract between plaintiff and Multigas by the individual defendants-appellants were absolute and unconditional. Discovery had been completed and the case was ready to go to trial at the time the bankruptcy petition was filed. Under such circumstances, the prejudice to plaintiff in being "required to await the conclusion of lengthy and complex reorganization proceedings before obtaining any remedy” outweighs any potential inconvenience to the defendants. (Lottes v Slater, supra, at 581.) Accordingly, the IAS Court did not abuse its discretion in severing the action against the bankrupt party (see, CPLR 603; Feldstein v Greater N Y. Councils, 16 AD2d 771). Concur—Rosenberger, J. P., Wallach, Ross, Kassal and Nardelli, JJ.

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

Related

Ingram v. City of New York
2025 NY Slip Op 31539(U) (New York Supreme Court, New York County, 2025)
Simmons v. Gateway I TP4 Hous. Dev. Fund Co., Inc.
2024 NY Slip Op 31752(U) (New York Supreme Court, New York County, 2024)
Vogric v. Pathmark Stores, Inc.
2019 NY Slip Op 1447 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2019)
Drir v. U-9 Rest. Assoc., Inc.
2019 NY Slip Op 79 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2019)
Katz v. Mount Vernon Dialysis, LLC
121 A.D.3d 856 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2014)
Moy v. St. Vincent's Hospital & Medical Center
92 A.D.3d 651 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2012)
Weber v. Baccarat, Inc.
70 A.D.3d 487 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)
Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc. v. Oxford Venture Partners, LLC
13 A.D.3d 89 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2004)
Kharmah v. Metropolitan Chiropractic Center
288 A.D.2d 94 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2001)
Torre v. Fay's, Inc.
259 A.D.2d 896 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1999)
Ryder v. Knopick
251 A.D.2d 732 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1998)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
194 A.D.2d 385, 598 N.Y.S.2d 522, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/golden-v-moscowitz-nyappdiv-1993.