Home/Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York/Goldstein v. Silverstein

Goldstein v. Silverstein

89 A.D.3d 497, 932 N.Y.2d 341
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedNovember 10, 2011
StatusPublished

This text of 89 A.D.3d 497 (Goldstein v. Silverstein) 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
Goldstein v. Silverstein, 89 A.D.3d 497, 932 N.Y.2d 341 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2011).

Opinion

[498]*498Plaintiffs improperly argue for the first time on appeal that dismissal of the action pursuant to CPLR 3404 was incorrect because the striking of the action from the trial calendar had returned the case to its pre-note of issue status (see Nieman v Sears, Roebuck & Co., 4 AD3d 255, 255 [2004]). Plaintiffs neither made a motion to restore the matter to the calendar within one year nor proffered an affidavit demonstrating that he had a meritorious cause of action. Concur — Tom, J.P, Andrias, Freedman and Richter, JJ.

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

Related

Nieman v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.
4 A.D.3d 255 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2004)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
89 A.D.3d 497, 932 N.Y.2d 341, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/goldstein-v-silverstein-nyappdiv-2011.