Gordon v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Gordon v. City of New York

106 A.D.3d 472, 965 N.Y.S.2d 872

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

DecidedMay 9, 2013

StatusPublished

This text of 106 A.D.3d 472 (Gordon v. City of New York) 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

Gordon v. City of New York, 106 A.D.3d 472, 965 N.Y.S.2d 872 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2013).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Milton A. Tingling, J.), entered September 30, 2011, which denied defendants-appellants’ motion to dismiss the complaint as asserted against them, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, the motion granted, and the complaint dismissed as against defendants-appellants, without prejudice. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment accordingly.

“[Wjhere a receiver has been discharged from any and all liability, he or she may not be sued unless the appointing court vacates its order and grants leave to sue” (Gadson v 1340 Hudson Realty Corp., 180 AD2d 582, 583 [1st Dept 1992]). Nothing in the record indicates that the Housing Court has vacated the consent order dated April 7, 2009, to which plaintiff was a party, discharging defendants as court-appointed administrators under article 7-A of the Real Property Actions and Proceedings Law. Concur—Andrias, J.P, Saxe, Freedman and Feinman, JJ.

Motion for sanctions denied.

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

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Milton A. Tingling, J.), entered September 30, 2011, which denied defendants-appellants’ motion to dismiss the complaint as asserted against them, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, the motion granted, and the complaint dismissed as against defendants-appellants, without prejudice. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment accordingly.

“[Wjhere a receiver has been discharged from any and all liability, he or she may not be sued unless the appointing court vacates its order and grants leave to sue” (Gadson v 1340 Hudson Realty Corp., 180 AD2d 582, 583 [1st Dept 1992]). Nothing in the record indicates that the Housing Court has vacated the consent order dated April 7, 2009, to which plaintiff was a party, discharging defendants as court-appointed administrators under article 7-A of the Real Property Actions and Proceedings Law. Concur—Andrias, J.P, Saxe, Freedman and Feinman, JJ.

Motion for sanctions denied.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

106 A.D.3d 472, 965 N.Y.S.2d 872, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gordon-v-city-of-new-york-nyappdiv-2013.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack