Mark G. v. Sabol

240 A.D.2d 185, 658 N.Y.S.2d 864, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5982
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Mark G. v. Sabol. Read the opinion of the Court — 247 A.D.2d 15

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Walter Tolub, J.), entered December 31, 1996, which, insofar as appealed from, denied, without prejudice and with leave to renew, plaintiffs’ motion to dismiss or sever the third-party action, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The IAS Court properly exercised its discretion in denying the motion. The claims in the two actions are sufficiently intertwined that one trial is both appropriate and judicially efficient (see, Erbach Fin. Corp. v Royal Bank, 203 AD2d 80). Furthermore, plaintiffs have failed to demonstrate prejudice with respect to any substantial right, or that the limited discovery sought by the third-party defendants would unduly delay the trial, particularly since the court addressed such contingency, stating that "if discovery is not completed by the time this action is to be tried then the plaintiffs may renew this application, which would be viewed favorably by the Court.” Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Ellerin, Tom, Mazzarelli and Andrias, JJ.

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

Mark G. v. Sabol, 240 A.D.2d 185, 658 N.Y.S.2d 864, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5982 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

240 A.D.2d 185 (Mark G. v. Sabol) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Erbach Finance Corp. v. Royal Bank of Canada
203 A.D.2d 80 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1994)