Grand Manor Health Related Facility, Inc. v. Hamilton Equities Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Grand Manor Health Related Facility, Inc. v. Hamilton Equities Inc.

71 A.D.3d 493, 895 N.Y.S.2d 716

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Grand Manor Health Related Facility, Inc. v. Hamilton Equities Inc.. Read the opinion of the Court — 65 A.D.3d 445 →

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided March 11, 2010·Published

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Lucindo Suarez, J.), entered September 29, 2009, which granted plaintiffs application to modify the Yellowstone injunction set forth in the parties’ stipulation, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, and the application denied.

The IAS court improperly broadened the Yellowstone injunction set forth in the parties’ so-ordered stipulation. This Court previously determined that the stipulation is an enforceable contract and cannot be revised by the IAS court (65 AD3d 445, 446-447 [2009]). Moreover, we specifically held that defendants’ service of a 30-day notice on the ground that no lease exists did not violate the underlying stipulation. This Court’s prior decision is binding because it is the law of the case (see generally Matter of Midland Ins. Co., 71 AD3d 221 [2010]). Concur&emdash; Mazzarelli, J.P., Saxe, Moskowitz, Acosta and Renwick, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Lucindo Suarez, J.), entered September 29, 2009, which granted plaintiffs application to modify the Yellowstone injunction set forth in the parties’ stipulation, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, and the application denied.

The IAS court improperly broadened the Yellowstone injunction set forth in the parties’ so-ordered stipulation. This Court previously determined that the stipulation is an enforceable contract and cannot be revised by the IAS court (65 AD3d 445, 446-447 [2009]). Moreover, we specifically held that defendants’ service of a 30-day notice on the ground that no lease exists did not violate the underlying stipulation. This Court’s prior decision is binding because it is the law of the case (see generally Matter of Midland Ins. Co., 71 AD3d 221 [2010]). Concur&emdash; Mazzarelli, J.P., Saxe, Moskowitz, Acosta and Renwick, JJ.

Grand Manor Health Related Facility, Inc. v. Hamilton Equities Inc., 71 A.D.3d 493, 895 N.Y.S.2d 716 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2010).

Pincite

71 A.D.3d 493 (Grand Manor Health Related Facility, Inc. v. Hamilton Equities Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.