Mileski v. MSC Indus. Direct Co., Inc.
This text of 2018 NY Slip Op 1461 (Mileski v. MSC Indus. Direct Co., Inc.) 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.
Opinion
| Mileski v MSC Indus. Direct Co., Inc. |
| 2018 NY Slip Op 01461 |
| Decided on March 7, 2018 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. |
| This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports. |
Decided on March 7, 2018 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
RUTH C. BALKIN, J.P.
JOHN M. LEVENTHAL
CHERYL E. CHAMBERS
ROBERT J. MILLER, JJ.
2016-07282
(Index No. 10391/09)
v
MSC Industrial Direct Co., Inc., defendant third-party plaintiff-appellant, et al., defendants; Buffalo Machinery Co., Ltd., third-party defendant-respondent, et al., third-party defendant.
Wilson Elser Moskowitz Edelman & Dicker LLP, White Plains, NY (Eliza M. Scheibel and Melissa McCarthy of counsel), for defendant third-party plaintiff-appellant.
Farber Brocks & Zane LLP, Garden City, NY (Tracy L. Frankel of counsel), for third-party defendant-respondent.
DECISION & ORDER
In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for wrongful death, etc., the defendant third-party plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Mayer, J.), dated May 23, 2016, which denied its motion for leave to renew its prior cross motion pursuant to CPLR 306-b and CPLR 311(b) to extend the time to serve the third-party complaint on the third-party defendant Buffalo Machinery Co., Ltd., and for leave to effectuate such service by alternate means, which cross motion had been denied by an order of the same court entered September 18, 2014.
ORDERED that the appeal is dismissed as academic, with costs, in light of our determination on the companion appeals (see Mileski v MSC Industrial Direct Co., Inc., _____ AD3d _____ [Appellate Division Docket No. 2014-11031; decided herewith]).
BALKIN, J.P., LEVENTHAL, CHAMBERS and MILLER, JJ., concur.
ENTER:Aprilanne Agostino
Clerk of the Court
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
2018 NY Slip Op 1461, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mileski-v-msc-indus-direct-co-inc-nyappdiv-2018.