Grossberger v. Southbridge Towers

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Grossberger v. Southbridge Towers

205 A.D.2d 401, 614 N.Y.S.2d 128

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

DecidedJune 21, 1994

StatusPublished

This text of 205 A.D.2d 401 (Grossberger v. Southbridge Towers) 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

Grossberger v. Southbridge Towers, 205 A.D.2d 401, 614 N.Y.S.2d 128 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Beverly Cohen, J.), entered on or about May 12, 1993, which, inter alia, denied plaintiffs’ motion to renew a prior order, same court and Justice, entered March 2, 1992, dismissing the complaint for plaintiff husband’s failure to appear at a deposition ordered by the court, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The order appealed from is nonappealable insofar as it denied reargument (Charney v North Jersey Trading Corp., 184 AD2d 409), and insofar as it may be deemed to have denied renewal, we agree with the IAS Court that plaintiff husband failed to offer a valid excuse for not submitting the additional facts concerning plaintiff wife’s death and his own illness on the original motion (Mangine v Keller, 182 AD2d 476, 477). Concur—Rosenberger, J. P., Kupferman, Ross, Nardelli and Tom, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Beverly Cohen, J.), entered on or about May 12, 1993, which, inter alia, denied plaintiffs’ motion to renew a prior order, same court and Justice, entered March 2, 1992, dismissing the complaint for plaintiff husband’s failure to appear at a deposition ordered by the court, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The order appealed from is nonappealable insofar as it denied reargument (Charney v North Jersey Trading Corp., 184 AD2d 409), and insofar as it may be deemed to have denied renewal, we agree with the IAS Court that plaintiff husband failed to offer a valid excuse for not submitting the additional facts concerning plaintiff wife’s death and his own illness on the original motion (Mangine v Keller, 182 AD2d 476, 477). Concur—Rosenberger, J. P., Kupferman, Ross, Nardelli and Tom, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

205 A.D.2d 401, 614 N.Y.S.2d 128, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/grossberger-v-southbridge-towers-nyappdiv-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack