O'Connell v. Russell

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

O'Connell v. Russell

298 A.D.2d 925, 748 N.Y.S.2d 87, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9134

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

DecidedOctober 1, 2002

StatusPublished

This text of 298 A.D.2d 925 (O'Connell v. Russell) 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

O'Connell v. Russell, 298 A.D.2d 925, 748 N.Y.S.2d 87, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9134 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal from an order and judgment (one document) of Supreme Court, Ontario County (Henry, Jr., J.), entered March 6, 2001, which, inter alia, granted defendants’ cross motion seeking summary judgment and an award of attorney’s fees.

It is hereby ordered that the order and judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed with costs.

Memorandum: Supreme Court properly granted that part of defendants’ cross motion seeking an award of attorney’s fees pursuant to 22 NYCRR 130-1.1. Defendants are “entitled to recover reasonable attorney’s fees pursuant to section 130-1.1 for plaintiffs frivolous conduct in commencing and prosecuting this baseless action” (Cinque v Schieferstein, 292 AD2d 197, 198). Present — Pigott, Jr., P.J., Green, Hayes, Kehoe and Gorski, JJ.

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

—Appeal from an order and judgment (one document) of Supreme Court, Ontario County (Henry, Jr., J.), entered March 6, 2001, which, inter alia, granted defendants’ cross motion seeking summary judgment and an award of attorney’s fees.

It is hereby ordered that the order and judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed with costs.

Memorandum: Supreme Court properly granted that part of defendants’ cross motion seeking an award of attorney’s fees pursuant to 22 NYCRR 130-1.1. Defendants are “entitled to recover reasonable attorney’s fees pursuant to section 130-1.1 for plaintiffs frivolous conduct in commencing and prosecuting this baseless action” (Cinque v Schieferstein, 292 AD2d 197, 198). Present — Pigott, Jr., P.J., Green, Hayes, Kehoe and Gorski, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

298 A.D.2d 925, 748 N.Y.S.2d 87, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9134, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/oconnell-v-russell-nyappdiv-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack