Rivera v. Bruchim

103 A.D.3d 700, 959 N.Y.S.2d 448
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedFebruary 13, 2013
StatusPublished
Cited by12 cases

This text of 103 A.D.3d 700 (Rivera v. Bruchim) 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
Rivera v. Bruchim, 103 A.D.3d 700, 959 N.Y.S.2d 448 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2013).

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the appeal is from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Lewis, J.), dated January 13, 2012, which, in effect, denied a motion pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (8) to dismiss the complaint insofar as asserted against Jacob Bruchim and granted the plaintiffs’ cross motion, in effect, to appoint American Transit Insurance Company to act as temporary administrator of the estate of Jacob Bruchim for certain purposes and to amend the complaint to add the administrator of the estate of Jacob Bruchim as a defendant in the action.

Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, without costs or disbursements, and the order is vacated.

The death of Jacob Bruchim prior to the commencement of this action rendered the action, insofar as asserted against him, a legal nullity from its inception, and the Supreme Court had no jurisdiction to grant the requested relief (see Wendover Fin. [701]*701Servs. v Ridgeway, 93 AD3d 1156, 1157 [2012]; Maldonado v Law Off. of Mary A. Bjork, 64 AD3d 425, 426 [2009]; Marte v Graber, 58 AD3d 1, 4-5 [2008]; Jordan v City of New York, 23 AD3d 436, 437 [2005]; see also Arbelaez v Chun Kuei Wu, 18 AD3d 583, 584 [2005]; Laurenti v Teatom, 210 AD2d 300, 301 [1994]). Accordingly, the order appealed from is a nullity, and this Court has no jurisdiction to entertain the appeal (see JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. v Rosemberg, 90 AD3d 713, 714 [2011]). Mas tro, J.P., Skelos, Leventhal and Chambers, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Ramneg Realty Corp. v. Cevallos
2024 NY Slip Op 50750(U) (New York Supreme Court, Bronx County, 2024)
Hussain v. Chain
217 A.D.3d 929 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2023)
Flynn v. Town of Southampton
2019 NY Slip Op 8393 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2019)
Franco v. Ketterer
2019 NY Slip Op 5517 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2019)
Cutler v. Thomas
2019 NY Slip Op 2675 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2019)
Matter of Foreclosure of Tax Liens v. Goldman
2018 NY Slip Op 7123 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2018)
US Bank National Ass'n v. Cadeumag
2017 NY Slip Op 1014 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2017)
Krysa v. Estate of Qyra
136 A.D.3d 760 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2016)
Gorbaty v. Brodsky
129 A.D.3d 1023 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2015)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
103 A.D.3d 700, 959 N.Y.S.2d 448, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rivera-v-bruchim-nyappdiv-2013.