Interface Solutions, Inc. v. Donoghue

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Interface Solutions, Inc. v. Donoghue

37 A.D.3d 1127, 827 N.Y.S.2d 910

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

DecidedFebruary 2, 2007

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 37 A.D.3d 1127 (Interface Solutions, Inc. v. Donoghue) 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

Interface Solutions, Inc. v. Donoghue, 37 A.D.3d 1127, 827 N.Y.S.2d 910 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2007).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Oswego County (James W. McCarthy, A.J.), entered September 2, 2005. The order granted plaintiffs motion for a preliminary injunction enjoining and prohibiting defendants from, among other things, interfering with any persons entering or leaving any entrance to plaintiffs facility.

It is hereby ordered that said appeal be and the same hereby is unanimously dismissed with costs.

[1128]*1128Memorandum: The appeal has been rendered moot by the expiration of the challenged injunction (see Duane Reade Inc. v Local 338, Retail, Wholesale, Dept. Store Union, UFCW, AFL-CIO, 11 AD3d 406 [2004]; Sager Spuck Statewide Supply Co. v Meyer, 273 AD2d 745, 746 [2000]; see generally Matter of Hearst Corp. v Clyne, 50 NY2d 707, 714 [1980]), and defendants have failed to establish that this case falls within an exception to the mootness doctrine (see Hearst Corp., 50 NY2d at 714-715; Steckmeyer v Whalen, 269 AD2d 855 [2000]; Matter of Forth, 254 AD2d 836, 837 [1998]; Matter of McGrath, 245 AD2d 1081 [1997]). Present—Martoche, J.P, Smith, Centra, Lunn and Fahey, JJ.

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

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Oswego County (James W. McCarthy, A.J.), entered September 2, 2005. The order granted plaintiffs motion for a preliminary injunction enjoining and prohibiting defendants from, among other things, interfering with any persons entering or leaving any entrance to plaintiffs facility.

It is hereby ordered that said appeal be and the same hereby is unanimously dismissed with costs.

[1128]*1128Memorandum: The appeal has been rendered moot by the expiration of the challenged injunction (see Duane Reade Inc. v Local 338, Retail, Wholesale, Dept. Store Union, UFCW, AFL-CIO, 11 AD3d 406 [2004]; Sager Spuck Statewide Supply Co. v Meyer, 273 AD2d 745, 746 [2000]; see generally Matter of Hearst Corp. v Clyne, 50 NY2d 707, 714 [1980]), and defendants have failed to establish that this case falls within an exception to the mootness doctrine (see Hearst Corp., 50 NY2d at 714-715; Steckmeyer v Whalen, 269 AD2d 855 [2000]; Matter of Forth, 254 AD2d 836, 837 [1998]; Matter of McGrath, 245 AD2d 1081 [1997]). Present—Martoche, J.P, Smith, Centra, Lunn and Fahey, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

37 A.D.3d 1127, 827 N.Y.S.2d 910, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/interface-solutions-inc-v-donoghue-nyappdiv-2007.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack