Koch v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Greater New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Koch v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Greater New York

109 A.D.2d 654, 486 N.Y.S.2d 243, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 47133

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

DecidedMarch 14, 1985

StatusPublished

This text of 109 A.D.2d 654 (Koch v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Greater New York) 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

Koch v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Greater New York, 109 A.D.2d 654, 486 N.Y.S.2d 243, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 47133 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1985).

Pincite

Opinion

— Order, Supreme Court, New York (Bruce Wright, J.), entered on or about February 16, 1984, which dismissed the petition against respondent Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Greater New York with prejudice, is unanimously modified, on the law and the facts, to the extent of deleting the words “with prejudice” and replacing them with the words “without prejudice”, and otherwise affirmed, without costs.

Petitioner seeks a permanent injunction against respondent Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Greater New York, in order to prevent respondent from barring him, and other similarly situated males, from participation in the annual “Women on the Move” road races sponsored by it. Respondent moved to dismiss. Special Term granted the motion with prejudice. We disagree.

Special Term correctly decided that the respondent was an improper party to this proceeding. However, we find that Special Term erred when, without converting the proceeding to a plenary action (CPLR103), it decided this proceeding on the merits, [655]*655and dismissed it with prejudice. Based upon the facts before us, we dismiss the proceeding without prejudice, since petitioner is entitled to commence a plenary action. Concur — Kupferman, J. P., Ross, Carro and Bloom, JJ.

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

— Order, Supreme Court, New York (Bruce Wright, J.), entered on or about February 16, 1984, which dismissed the petition against respondent Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Greater New York with prejudice, is unanimously modified, on the law and the facts, to the extent of deleting the words “with prejudice” and replacing them with the words “without prejudice”, and otherwise affirmed, without costs.

Petitioner seeks a permanent injunction against respondent Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Greater New York, in order to prevent respondent from barring him, and other similarly situated males, from participation in the annual “Women on the Move” road races sponsored by it. Respondent moved to dismiss. Special Term granted the motion with prejudice. We disagree.

Special Term correctly decided that the respondent was an improper party to this proceeding. However, we find that Special Term erred when, without converting the proceeding to a plenary action (CPLR103), it decided this proceeding on the merits, [655]*655and dismissed it with prejudice. Based upon the facts before us, we dismiss the proceeding without prejudice, since petitioner is entitled to commence a plenary action. Concur — Kupferman, J. P., Ross, Carro and Bloom, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

109 A.D.2d 654, 486 N.Y.S.2d 243, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 47133, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/koch-v-blue-cross-blue-shield-of-greater-new-york-nyappdiv-1985.