Hyman v. QUEENS COUNTY BANCORP, INC.

New York Court of Appeals

Hyman v. QUEENS COUNTY BANCORP, INC.

814 N.E.2d 454, 2 N.Y.3d 819, 2 N.Y. 819, 781 N.Y.S.2d 282, 2004 N.Y. LEXIS 1366

DecidedJune 8, 2004

StatusPublished

This text of 814 N.E.2d 454 (Hyman v. QUEENS COUNTY BANCORP, INC.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Hyman v. QUEENS COUNTY BANCORP, INC., 814 N.E.2d 454, 2 N.Y.3d 819, 2 N.Y. 819, 781 N.Y.S.2d 282, 2004 N.Y. LEXIS 1366 (N.Y. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

Motion, insofar as it seeks to dismiss the appeal from that portion of the Appellate Division order that dismissed the appeal to that Court from Supreme Court’s order denying appellants’ motion for “leave to renew and reargue,” granted, without costs, upon the ground that such part of the order does not finally determine the action within the meaning of the Constitution; motion to dismiss the appeal otherwise denied. Motion to strike material from the record on appeal and references thereto in appellants’ brief granted to the extent that the two additional photographs and the Edelson affidavit submitted on the motion for “leave to renew and reargue” and references thereto in appellants’ brief are deemed stricken. Motion for an enlargement of the time to file a respondent’s brief to 30 days after disposition of this motion granted.

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

Motion, insofar as it seeks to dismiss the appeal from that portion of the Appellate Division order that dismissed the appeal to that Court from Supreme Court’s order denying appellants’ motion for “leave to renew and reargue,” granted, without costs, upon the ground that such part of the order does not finally determine the action within the meaning of the Constitution; motion to dismiss the appeal otherwise denied. Motion to strike material from the record on appeal and references thereto in appellants’ brief granted to the extent that the two additional photographs and the Edelson affidavit submitted on the motion for “leave to renew and reargue” and references thereto in appellants’ brief are deemed stricken. Motion for an enlargement of the time to file a respondent’s brief to 30 days after disposition of this motion granted.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

814 N.E.2d 454, 2 N.Y.3d 819, 2 N.Y. 819, 781 N.Y.S.2d 282, 2004 N.Y. LEXIS 1366, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hyman-v-queens-county-bancorp-inc-ny-2004.