Nares v. M & W Waterproofing

818 N.E.2d 660, 3 N.Y.3d 698, 785 N.Y.S.2d 18, 2004 N.Y. LEXIS 2312
New York Court of Appeals·Decided September 21, 2004·Published

Opinion

Motion by NTJ Associates for leave to appeal from the March 9, 2004 Appellate Division order dismissed upon the ground that the order does not finally determine the action within the meaning of the Constitution (see Whitfield v City of New York, *699 90 NY2d 777, 780-781 [1997]). Motion by M & W Waterproofing for leave to appeal from the April 8, 2004 amended judgment of Supreme Court dismissed as untimely (see Whitfield v City of New York, 90 NY2d 777, 781 [1997]).

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

Nares v. M & W Waterproofing, 818 N.E.2d 660, 3 N.Y.3d 698, 785 N.Y.S.2d 18, 2004 N.Y. LEXIS 2312 (N.Y. 2004).

818 N.E.2d 660 (Nares v. M & W Waterproofing) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Whitfield v. City of New York
689 N.E.2d 515 (New York Court of Appeals, 1997)