King v. Milazzo

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

King v. Milazzo

155 A.D.2d 1000

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

DecidedNovember 15, 1989

DocketAppeal No. 1

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 155 A.D.2d 1000 (King v. Milazzo) 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

King v. Milazzo, 155 A.D.2d 1000 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1989).

Pincite

Opinion

— Order unanimously reversed on the law without costs and motion denied. Memorandum: Supreme Court erred in granting defendant Hopkins further discovery. By demanding that plaintiffs file a note of issue defendant was no longer entitled to further deposition (see, CPLR 3216; Wolanin v Halliman, 145 AD2d 967, 968; Gray v Crouse-Irving Mem. Hosp., 107 AD2d 1038). (Appeal from order of Supreme Court, Erie County, Gossel, J. — discovery.) Present — Dillon, P. J., Boomer, Green, Pine and Balio, JJ.

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

— Order unanimously reversed on the law without costs and motion denied. Memorandum: Supreme Court erred in granting defendant Hopkins further discovery. By demanding that plaintiffs file a note of issue defendant was no longer entitled to further deposition (see, CPLR 3216; Wolanin v Halliman, 145 AD2d 967, 968; Gray v Crouse-Irving Mem. Hosp., 107 AD2d 1038). (Appeal from order of Supreme Court, Erie County, Gossel, J. — discovery.) Present — Dillon, P. J., Boomer, Green, Pine and Balio, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

155 A.D.2d 1000, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/king-v-milazzo-nyappdiv-1989.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack