Mayes v. UVI Holding LLC

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Mayes v. UVI Holding LLC

301 A.D.2d 409, 752 N.Y.S.2d 868, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 234

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

DecidedJanuary 14, 2003

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 301 A.D.2d 409 (Mayes v. UVI Holding LLC) 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

Mayes v. UVI Holding LLC, 301 A.D.2d 409, 752 N.Y.S.2d 868, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 234 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Herman Cahn, J.), entered March 8, 2002, which, in an action for wrongful eviction, denied defendant City Marshal’s motion for summary judgment on her third cross claim for damages as against defendant attorneys, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

On a prior appeal that brought up for review, among other things, the denial of the Marshal’s motion seeking dismissal of the complaint as against her and summary judgment on her cross claims against the landlord and the attorneys (280 AD2d 153, 155), we held that the complaint should have been dismissed as against the Marshal, and that such dismissal rendered moot her cross claims against the landlord and the attorneys (id. at 159). That decision, which did not distinguish between the Marshal’s first two cross claims for indemnification and contribution and her third cross claim seeking damages for loss of reputation, loss of income and legal expenses incurred, precluded the motion court’s consideration of the third cross claim (see Preston Corp. v Fabrication Enters., 68 NY2d 397, 405). We note that the Marshal never moved to reargue this Court’s prior decision. Concur — Nardelli, J.P., Tom, Mazzarelli, Andrias and Saxe, JJ.

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

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Herman Cahn, J.), entered March 8, 2002, which, in an action for wrongful eviction, denied defendant City Marshal’s motion for summary judgment on her third cross claim for damages as against defendant attorneys, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

On a prior appeal that brought up for review, among other things, the denial of the Marshal’s motion seeking dismissal of the complaint as against her and summary judgment on her cross claims against the landlord and the attorneys (280 AD2d 153, 155), we held that the complaint should have been dismissed as against the Marshal, and that such dismissal rendered moot her cross claims against the landlord and the attorneys (id. at 159). That decision, which did not distinguish between the Marshal’s first two cross claims for indemnification and contribution and her third cross claim seeking damages for loss of reputation, loss of income and legal expenses incurred, precluded the motion court’s consideration of the third cross claim (see Preston Corp. v Fabrication Enters., 68 NY2d 397, 405). We note that the Marshal never moved to reargue this Court’s prior decision. Concur — Nardelli, J.P., Tom, Mazzarelli, Andrias and Saxe, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

301 A.D.2d 409, 752 N.Y.S.2d 868, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 234, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mayes-v-uvi-holding-llc-nyappdiv-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack