Henry v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Henry v. City of New York

126 A.D.3d 648, 4 N.Y.S.3d 497, 2015 NY Slip Op 02701, 2015 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2702

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

DecidedMarch 31, 2015

Docket14671 304637/09

StatusPublished

This text of 126 A.D.3d 648 (Henry 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

Henry v. City of New York, 126 A.D.3d 648, 4 N.Y.S.3d 497, 2015 NY Slip Op 02701, 2015 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2702 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2015).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Larry S. Schachner, J.), entered July 25, 2013, which denied plaintiffs motion to reargue the denial of his motion for a default judgment against defendant Captain “John” Cruz, unanimously dismissed, without costs, as taken from a nonappealable order.

Plaintiff designated the motion that resulted in the order appealed from as one for reargument, set forth the standard for a motion to reargue in his motion papers, and did not present any new facts on the motion. The court unambiguously denied the request for reargument, and it is well established that no appeal lies from an order denying reargument (see e.g. Cangro v Park S. Towers Assoc., 123 AD3d 602 [1st Dept 2014]; D&A *649 Constr., Inc. v New York City Hous. Auth., 105 AD3d 464 [1st Dept 2013]).

Concur — Friedman, J.P., Renwick, Moskowitz, Richter and Clark, JJ.

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

Appeal from order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Larry S. Schachner, J.), entered July 25, 2013, which denied plaintiffs motion to reargue the denial of his motion for a default judgment against defendant Captain “John” Cruz, unanimously dismissed, without costs, as taken from a nonappealable order.

Plaintiff designated the motion that resulted in the order appealed from as one for reargument, set forth the standard for a motion to reargue in his motion papers, and did not present any new facts on the motion. The court unambiguously denied the request for reargument, and it is well established that no appeal lies from an order denying reargument (see e.g. Cangro v Park S. Towers Assoc., 123 AD3d 602 [1st Dept 2014]; D&A *649 Constr., Inc. v New York City Hous. Auth., 105 AD3d 464 [1st Dept 2013]).

Concur — Friedman, J.P., Renwick, Moskowitz, Richter and Clark, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

126 A.D.3d 648, 4 N.Y.S.3d 497, 2015 NY Slip Op 02701, 2015 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2702, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/henry-v-city-of-new-york-nyappdiv-2015.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack