Johnnies Pelham Road Service, Inc. v. Thomas

38 A.D.3d 611, 830 N.Y.S.2d 668

This text of 38 A.D.3d 611 (Johnnies Pelham Road Service, Inc. v. Thomas) 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
Johnnies Pelham Road Service, Inc. v. Thomas, 38 A.D.3d 611, 830 N.Y.S.2d 668 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2007).

Opinion

In an action, inter alia, for specific performance of a right of first refusal contained in a lease, the defendant appeals from (1) a decision of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Smith, J.), dated April 17, 2006, and (2) an order of the same court dated June 19, 2006, which, upon the decision, granted the plaintiffs motion for the release of a bond it had posted following the granting of a preliminary injunction and directed the Clerk of the County of Westchester to release to the plaintiff the sum of $125,000, plus all accrued interest, minus the Westchester County statutory fees, to the plaintiffs attorney.

Ordered that the appeal from the decision is dismissed, as no appeal lies from a decision (see Schicchi v J.A. Green Constr. Corp., 100 AD2d 509 [1984]); and it is further,

Ordered that on the Court’s own motion, the notice of appeal from an order dated May 2, 2006 is deemed a premature notice of appeal from the order dated June 19, 2006 (see CPLR 5520 [c]); and it is further,

Ordered that the order dated June 19, 2006 is affirmed; and it is further,

Ordered that one bill of costs is awarded to the respondent.

We do not reach the defendant’s contention that the Supreme Court lacked personal jurisdiction over him, as that issue was one that could have been litigated on the defendant’s appeal from a prior order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Barone, J.), dated March 22, 2005, which appeal was dismissed by order of this Court dated November 10, 2005, for failure to prosecute (see Bray v Cox, 38 NY2d 350, 355 [1976]; Horan v Ocean Ships, 262 AD2d 531 [1999]).

The defendant’s remaining contention is without merit for reasons stated by Justice Smith in the Supreme Court. Mastro, J.P, Spolzino, Krausman and Balkin, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Bray v. Cox
342 N.E.2d 575 (New York Court of Appeals, 1976)
Schicchi v. J. A. Green Construction Corp.
100 A.D.2d 509 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1984)
Horan v. Ocean Ships, Inc.
262 A.D.2d 531 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1999)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
38 A.D.3d 611, 830 N.Y.S.2d 668, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/johnnies-pelham-road-service-inc-v-thomas-nyappdiv-2007.