P & N Tiffany Properties, Inc. v. Maron

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

P & N Tiffany Properties, Inc. v. Maron

34 A.D.3d 548, 823 N.Y.S.2d 676

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided November 14, 2006·Published

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for malicious prosecution and abuse of process, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Jamieson, J), entered February 16, 2006, which denied its motion pursuant to CPLR 8404 for judicial review of taxation of costs and disbursements in the principal sum of $965.62, which were awarded to the defendants in a clerk’s judgment of the same court dated June 1, 2005.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The plaintiffs contentions that the costs and disbursements awarded to the defendants were improperly taxed and that the Supreme Court failed to perform a judicial review of such taxation are without merit (see CPLR 8101, 8201, 8301 [a] [12]; 8404; Shapiro v Aetna Cas. & Sur. Co., 73 AD2d 616 [1979]; East Thirteenth St. Community Assn. v New York State Urban Dev. Corp., 164 Misc 2d 589).

Under the facts of this case, we decline to impose a sanction against the plaintiff (see 22 NYCRR 130-1.1 [a]). Adams, J.E, Ritter, Mastro and Lifson, JJ., concur.

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

In an action to recover damages for malicious prosecution and abuse of process, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Jamieson, J), entered February 16, 2006, which denied its motion pursuant to CPLR 8404 for judicial review of taxation of costs and disbursements in the principal sum of $965.62, which were awarded to the defendants in a clerk’s judgment of the same court dated June 1, 2005.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The plaintiffs contentions that the costs and disbursements awarded to the defendants were improperly taxed and that the Supreme Court failed to perform a judicial review of such taxation are without merit (see CPLR 8101, 8201, 8301 [a] [12]; 8404; Shapiro v Aetna Cas. & Sur. Co., 73 AD2d 616 [1979]; East Thirteenth St. Community Assn. v New York State Urban Dev. Corp., 164 Misc 2d 589).

Under the facts of this case, we decline to impose a sanction against the plaintiff (see 22 NYCRR 130-1.1 [a]). Adams, J.E, Ritter, Mastro and Lifson, JJ., concur.

P & N Tiffany Properties, Inc. v. Maron, 34 A.D.3d 548, 823 N.Y.S.2d 676 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2006).

Pincite

34 A.D.3d 548 (P & N Tiffany Properties, Inc. v. Maron) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related