Marlin Entertainment Group, Ltd. v. Mansoor

282 A.D.2d 579, 722 N.Y.S.2d 908, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3762
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided April 16, 2001·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

—In an action to enforce a confession of judgment, Amos Weinberg, attorney for the nonparty City Marshall of the City of New York, appeals from an order of the Supreme [580] Court, Nassau County (Davis, J.), dated May 15, 2000, which, inter alia, upon granting the motion of the City Marshall of the City of New York for an poundage pursuant to CPLR 8012, and after a hearing, imposed a sanction against him pursuant to 22 NYCRR 130-1.1.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

Upon the consideration of the attendant circumstances of this case, the Supreme Court’s imposition of a sanction against the appellant was a provident exercise of its discretion (see, 22 NYCRR 130-1.1 [a], [c], [d]; 130-l.la [b]; Clark v J.R.D. Mgt. Corp., 248 AD2d 581; cf., Haddad v Haddad, 272 AD2d 371; see generally, Matter of Minister, Elders & Deacons of Refm. Prot. Dutch Church v 198 Broadway, 76 NY2d 411). Krausman, J. P., Friedmann, Feuerstein and Smith, JJ., concur.

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

Marlin Entertainment Group, Ltd. v. Mansoor, 282 A.D.2d 579, 722 N.Y.S.2d 908, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3762 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

282 A.D.2d 579 (Marlin Entertainment Group, Ltd. v. Mansoor) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Pinto v. Pinto
286 A.D.2d 377 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2001)