Marine Midland Bank, N. A. v. Cohen

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Marine Midland Bank, N. A. v. Cohen

125 A.D.2d 827, 510 N.Y.S.2d 489, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 63032

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

DecidedDecember 24, 1986

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 125 A.D.2d 827 (Marine Midland Bank, N. A. v. Cohen) 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

Marine Midland Bank, N. A. v. Cohen, 125 A.D.2d 827, 510 N.Y.S.2d 489, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 63032 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1986).

Pincite

Opinion

— Weiss, J.

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court at Special Term (Kuhnen, J.), entered June 27, 1985 in Broome County, which denied plaintiffs motion for summary judgment and granted the cross motion of defendants G. Paul Cohen and Sharol F. Cohen for summary judgment dismissing the complaint against them.

The parties in this action to recover on a note accompanying a secondary mortgage on property owned by defendants at 33-35 Court Street in the City of Binghamton have advised this court that a settlement has been reached. This being the case, the controversy is moot and we discern no reason to accede to plaintiffs request to render an advisory decision on the issues raised (see, Matter of Starmer v Whitney Point Cent. School Dist., 96 AD2d 640).

Appeal dismissed, as moot, without costs. Mahoney, P. J., Main, Weiss, Yesawich, Jr., and Levine, JJ., concur.

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

— Weiss, J.

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court at Special Term (Kuhnen, J.), entered June 27, 1985 in Broome County, which denied plaintiffs motion for summary judgment and granted the cross motion of defendants G. Paul Cohen and Sharol F. Cohen for summary judgment dismissing the complaint against them.

The parties in this action to recover on a note accompanying a secondary mortgage on property owned by defendants at 33-35 Court Street in the City of Binghamton have advised this court that a settlement has been reached. This being the case, the controversy is moot and we discern no reason to accede to plaintiffs request to render an advisory decision on the issues raised (see, Matter of Starmer v Whitney Point Cent. School Dist., 96 AD2d 640).

Appeal dismissed, as moot, without costs. Mahoney, P. J., Main, Weiss, Yesawich, Jr., and Levine, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

125 A.D.2d 827, 510 N.Y.S.2d 489, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 63032, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/marine-midland-bank-n-a-v-cohen-nyappdiv-1986.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack