Guthartz v. City of New York

New York Court of Appeals

Guthartz v. City of New York

464 N.E.2d 479, 62 N.Y.2d 632, 476 N.Y.S.2d 111, 1984 N.Y. LEXIS 4258

New York Court of Appeals·Decided April 3, 1984·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The appeal should be dismissed upon the ground that the “judgment” appealed from does not finally determine the action within the meaning of the Constitution. Although [633] the causes of action contained in the complaint have been finally disposed of, the record shows that a counterclaim is still pending and that it is sufficiently related to the complaint to preclude application of the doctrine of implied severance (see Lizza Inds. v Long Is. Light. Co., 36 NY2d 754).

Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Jones, Wacht-ler, Simons and Kaye concur; Judge Meyer taking no part.

Appeal dismissed, without costs, in a memorandum.

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

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The appeal should be dismissed upon the ground that the “judgment” appealed from does not finally determine the action within the meaning of the Constitution. Although [633] the causes of action contained in the complaint have been finally disposed of, the record shows that a counterclaim is still pending and that it is sufficiently related to the complaint to preclude application of the doctrine of implied severance (see Lizza Inds. v Long Is. Light. Co., 36 NY2d 754).

Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Jones, Wacht-ler, Simons and Kaye concur; Judge Meyer taking no part.

Appeal dismissed, without costs, in a memorandum.

Guthartz v. City of New York, 464 N.E.2d 479, 62 N.Y.2d 632, 476 N.Y.S.2d 111, 1984 N.Y. LEXIS 4258 (N.Y. 1984).

Pincite

464 N.E.2d 479 (Guthartz v. City of New York) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related