Mangla v. General Motors Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Mangla v. General Motors Corp.

214 A.D.2d 1053, 626 N.Y.S.2d 710, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6939

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

DecidedApril 28, 1995

StatusPublished

This text of 214 A.D.2d 1053 (Mangla v. General Motors Corp.) 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

Mangla v. General Motors Corp., 214 A.D.2d 1053, 626 N.Y.S.2d 710, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6939 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

Motion to dismiss appeal denied. Memorandum: It is well-settled that an order denying a motion for reargument is not appealable. However, Supreme Court’s characterization of plaintiffs motion as one for reargument is not conclusive, and the record must be examined to determine whether the motion was for renewal or reargument (see, e.g., Nelson v Bushwick Family Health Ctr., 87 AD2d 837, 838; Rector of St. Bartholomew’s Church v Committee to Preserve St. Bartholomew’s Church, 84 AD2d 309, 316-317). The motion papers are inadequate to enable this Court to make that determination. Present— Green, J. P., Lawton, Fallon, Balio and Boehm, JJ.

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

Motion to dismiss appeal denied. Memorandum: It is well-settled that an order denying a motion for reargument is not appealable. However, Supreme Court’s characterization of plaintiffs motion as one for reargument is not conclusive, and the record must be examined to determine whether the motion was for renewal or reargument (see, e.g., Nelson v Bushwick Family Health Ctr., 87 AD2d 837, 838; Rector of St. Bartholomew’s Church v Committee to Preserve St. Bartholomew’s Church, 84 AD2d 309, 316-317). The motion papers are inadequate to enable this Court to make that determination. Present— Green, J. P., Lawton, Fallon, Balio and Boehm, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

214 A.D.2d 1053, 626 N.Y.S.2d 710, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6939, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mangla-v-general-motors-corp-nyappdiv-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack