Hale House Center, Inc. v. Michael Lee & Co.

308 A.D.2d 390, 764 N.Y.S.2d 626, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9703
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedSeptember 23, 2003
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 308 A.D.2d 390 (Hale House Center, Inc. v. Michael Lee & Co.) 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
Hale House Center, Inc. v. Michael Lee & Co., 308 A.D.2d 390, 764 N.Y.S.2d 626, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9703 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2003).

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Shirley Werner Kornreich, J.), entered April 30, 2003, which, in an action for accountant malpractice and breach of contract, denied defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, with leave to renew upon completion of disclosure, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

[391]*391Additional disclosure is necessary on the merits, as well as on the threshold statute of limitations issue and related continuous representation doctrine (see Ackerman v Price Waterhouse, 252 AD2d 179, 205 [1998]), before summary disposition can be considered. Concur — Buckley, P.J., Nardelli, Tom, Mazzarelli and Gonzalez, JJ.

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

Related

Kerman v. Friedman
6 A.D.3d 393 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2004)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
308 A.D.2d 390, 764 N.Y.S.2d 626, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9703, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hale-house-center-inc-v-michael-lee-co-nyappdiv-2003.