Reinah Development Corp. v. G.A.P. Hotel Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Reinah Development Corp. v. G.A.P. Hotel Corp.

78 A.D.2d 924, 434 N.Y.S.2d 1018, 1980 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13687

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

DecidedNovember 12, 1980

StatusPublished

This text of 78 A.D.2d 924 (Reinah Development Corp. v. G.A.P. Hotel Corp.) 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

Reinah Development Corp. v. G.A.P. Hotel Corp., 78 A.D.2d 924, 434 N.Y.S.2d 1018, 1980 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13687 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1980).

Pincite

Opinion

Motion for reargument granted, without costs, and upon reargument, the court adheres to its original decision dated October 23, 1980, denying appellant’s motion for a stay pending appeal. The law of the case establishes that the subject actions have been brought pursuant to the Debtor and Creditor Law. Therefore, recovery therein is limited to the extent necessary to satisfy appellant’s claim (Buckley Petroleum Prods, v Schwartz, 28 AD2d 640, 641) which, the court notes, has been reduced to judgment in the Supreme Court, New York County, for nominal damages only. Accordingly, appellant has failed to demonstrate sufficient merit on its pending appeal to warrant the granting of a stay. Motion for permission to appeal to the Court of Appeals denied, without costs. Mahoney, P. J., Greenblott, Sweeney, Kane and Herlihy, JJ., concur.

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

Motion for reargument granted, without costs, and upon reargument, the court adheres to its original decision dated October 23, 1980, denying appellant’s motion for a stay pending appeal. The law of the case establishes that the subject actions have been brought pursuant to the Debtor and Creditor Law. Therefore, recovery therein is limited to the extent necessary to satisfy appellant’s claim (Buckley Petroleum Prods, v Schwartz, 28 AD2d 640, 641) which, the court notes, has been reduced to judgment in the Supreme Court, New York County, for nominal damages only. Accordingly, appellant has failed to demonstrate sufficient merit on its pending appeal to warrant the granting of a stay. Motion for permission to appeal to the Court of Appeals denied, without costs. Mahoney, P. J., Greenblott, Sweeney, Kane and Herlihy, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

78 A.D.2d 924, 434 N.Y.S.2d 1018, 1980 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13687, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/reinah-development-corp-v-gap-hotel-corp-nyappdiv-1980.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack