Ravashiere v. Mahoney

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Ravashiere v. Mahoney

30 A.D.3d 1064, 815 N.Y.S.2d 869

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

DecidedJune 9, 2006

StatusPublished

This text of 30 A.D.3d 1064 (Ravashiere v. Mahoney) 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

Ravashiere v. Mahoney, 30 A.D.3d 1064, 815 N.Y.S.2d 869 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2006).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a judgment (denominated order) of the Supreme Court, Ontario County (James R. Harvey, A.J.), entered November 19, 2004. The judgment granted defendants’ motion for partial summary judgment dismissing the first cause of action and judgment on the first counterclaim, adjudged that certain real property is vested in fee simple in defendants and that plaintiffs and every other person claiming under them are barred from all claims to an estate or interest in that real property, and denied plaintiffs’ cross motion for partial summary judgment and for an order of preclusion.

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed without costs for reasons stated in decision at Supreme Court. Present—Pigott, Jr., PJ., Scudder, Kehoe, Smith and Pine, JJ.

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

Appeal from a judgment (denominated order) of the Supreme Court, Ontario County (James R. Harvey, A.J.), entered November 19, 2004. The judgment granted defendants’ motion for partial summary judgment dismissing the first cause of action and judgment on the first counterclaim, adjudged that certain real property is vested in fee simple in defendants and that plaintiffs and every other person claiming under them are barred from all claims to an estate or interest in that real property, and denied plaintiffs’ cross motion for partial summary judgment and for an order of preclusion.

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed without costs for reasons stated in decision at Supreme Court. Present—Pigott, Jr., PJ., Scudder, Kehoe, Smith and Pine, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

30 A.D.3d 1064, 815 N.Y.S.2d 869, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ravashiere-v-mahoney-nyappdiv-2006.