Liang v. Yi Jing Tan

140 A.D.3d 1029, 33 N.Y.S.3d 751
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided June 22, 2016·No. 2015-01613·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for conversion and breach of fiduciary duty, the defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Grays, J.), dated October 13, 2014, which denied their motion, denominated as one “for leave to reargue and reconsider” their prior motion, among other things, for a hearing on the issue of bribery of a witness, which was denied in an order of the same court dated June 26, 2014.

Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, with costs.

The defendants’ motion, denominated as one “for leave to reargue and reconsider” an order dated June 26, 2014, denying their motion, inter alia, for a hearing on the issue of bribery of a witness, is, in actuality, a motion for reargument. As the denial of a motion for reargument is not appealable (see George v Yoma Dev. Group, Inc., 83 AD3d 776 [2011]; Coccia v Liotti, 70 AD3d 747, 759 [2010]; Tokio Mar. & Fire Ins. Co., Ltd. v Borgia, 11 AD3d 603, 604 [2004]), the appeal must be dismissed (see George v Yoma Dev. Group, Inc., 83 AD3d at 776; Fahey v County of Nassau, 111 AD2d 214, 214 [1985]).

Mastro, J.P., Dickerson, Austin and Roman, JJ., concur.

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

Liang v. Yi Jing Tan, 140 A.D.3d 1029, 33 N.Y.S.3d 751 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2016).

140 A.D.3d 1029 (Liang v. Yi Jing Tan) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Deja Vu Act II, Inc. v. Thangarajah
164 N.Y.S.3d 835 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2022)
Uttamchandani v. Uttamchandani
2019 NY Slip Op 6645 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2019)
Feinman v. County of Nassau
2017 NY Slip Op 7110 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2017)