Osipova v. New York University

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Osipova v. New York University

157 A.D.2d 487, 549 N.Y.S.2d 674, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 155

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

DecidedJanuary 11, 1990

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 157 A.D.2d 487 (Osipova v. New York University) 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

Osipova v. New York University, 157 A.D.2d 487, 549 N.Y.S.2d 674, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 155 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1990).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Ira Gammerman, J.), entered October 21, 1988, dismissing with prejudice plaintiffs causes of action as against the institutional defendants, while severing and transferring back to the Judge who had initially heard this case the remaining cause of action against the governmental defendants, unanimously affirmed, without costs. The diverse appeals from all other written and oral interlocutory orders by Justices Gammerman and Kristin Booth Glen, brought up for review, are dismissed as superseded by that final order, without costs.

Plaintiffs refusal to go forward with selection of a jury on the appointed date for commencement of trial constituted abandonment of her claims against the institutional defendants. Concur—Murphy, P. J., Sullivan, Carro and Rosenberger, JJ.

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

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Ira Gammerman, J.), entered October 21, 1988, dismissing with prejudice plaintiffs causes of action as against the institutional defendants, while severing and transferring back to the Judge who had initially heard this case the remaining cause of action against the governmental defendants, unanimously affirmed, without costs. The diverse appeals from all other written and oral interlocutory orders by Justices Gammerman and Kristin Booth Glen, brought up for review, are dismissed as superseded by that final order, without costs.

Plaintiffs refusal to go forward with selection of a jury on the appointed date for commencement of trial constituted abandonment of her claims against the institutional defendants. Concur—Murphy, P. J., Sullivan, Carro and Rosenberger, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

157 A.D.2d 487, 549 N.Y.S.2d 674, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 155, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/osipova-v-new-york-university-nyappdiv-1990.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack