Peralta v. All Weather Tire Sales & Service, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Peralta v. All Weather Tire Sales & Service, Inc.

58 A.D.3d 823, 870 N.Y.S.2d 923

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

DecidedJanuary 27, 2009

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 58 A.D.3d 823 (Peralta v. All Weather Tire Sales & Service, 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.

Bluebook

Peralta v. All Weather Tire Sales & Service, Inc., 58 A.D.3d 823, 870 N.Y.S.2d 923 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2009).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the defendant Danilo Mendez and the third-party defendant Rosemary Peralta appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Rothenberg, J.), dated January 31, 2008, which denied their motion for leave to reargue their opposition to that branch of the plaintiffs’ motion which was to enforce a written settlement agreement dated June 7, 2004, which had been determined in an order of the same court dated August 31, 2007.

Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, without costs or disbursements, as no appeal lies from an order denying reargument (see Vandewinckel v Northport/East Northport Union Free School Dish, 24 AD3d 432, 433 [2005]; High v County of West-chester, 238 AD2d 476 [1997]; Foley v Roche, 68 AD2d 558, 568 [1979]). Mastro, J.E, Florio, Balkin and Eng, 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 personal injuries, etc., the defendant Danilo Mendez and the third-party defendant Rosemary Peralta appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Rothenberg, J.), dated January 31, 2008, which denied their motion for leave to reargue their opposition to that branch of the plaintiffs’ motion which was to enforce a written settlement agreement dated June 7, 2004, which had been determined in an order of the same court dated August 31, 2007.

Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, without costs or disbursements, as no appeal lies from an order denying reargument (see Vandewinckel v Northport/East Northport Union Free School Dish, 24 AD3d 432, 433 [2005]; High v County of West-chester, 238 AD2d 476 [1997]; Foley v Roche, 68 AD2d 558, 568 [1979]). Mastro, J.E, Florio, Balkin and Eng, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

58 A.D.3d 823, 870 N.Y.S.2d 923, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/peralta-v-all-weather-tire-sales-service-inc-nyappdiv-2009.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack