Kenford Co. v. County of Erie

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Kenford Co. v. County of Erie

185 A.D.2d 658

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided July 14, 1992·Published

Opinion

Appeal unanimously dismissed without costs. Memorandum: A motion must be addressed to a pending action, and Supreme Court was without jurisdiction to entertain a motion almost two years after final judgment was entered (see, Niagara Mohawk Power Corp. v Great Bend Aggregates [appeal No. 2], 181 AD2d 998; Urso v Panish, 94 AD2d 701). The entry of the final judgment terminated the action and all claims arising out of the same transactions are barred by well-settled principles of res judicata (see, O’Brien v City of Syracuse, 54 NY2d 353; Davie v Dwyer, 155 AD2d 921; Matter of Doherty v Cuomo, 76 AD2d 14, 20). (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Erie County, Fudeman, J.—Damages.) Present—Lawton, J. P., Boehm, Davis and Doerr, JJ.

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

Appeal unanimously dismissed without costs. Memorandum: A motion must be addressed to a pending action, and Supreme Court was without jurisdiction to entertain a motion almost two years after final judgment was entered (see, Niagara Mohawk Power Corp. v Great Bend Aggregates [appeal No. 2], 181 AD2d 998; Urso v Panish, 94 AD2d 701). The entry of the final judgment terminated the action and all claims arising out of the same transactions are barred by well-settled principles of res judicata (see, O’Brien v City of Syracuse, 54 NY2d 353; Davie v Dwyer, 155 AD2d 921; Matter of Doherty v Cuomo, 76 AD2d 14, 20). (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Erie County, Fudeman, J.—Damages.) Present—Lawton, J. P., Boehm, Davis and Doerr, JJ.

Kenford Co. v. County of Erie, 185 A.D.2d 658 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1992).

Pincite

185 A.D.2d 658 (Kenford Co. v. County of Erie) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related