Rodriguez v. Chan

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Rodriguez v. Chan

272 A.D.2d 599, 709 N.Y.S.2d 423

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

DecidedMay 30, 2000

StatusPublished

This text of 272 A.D.2d 599 (Rodriguez v. Chan) 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

Rodriguez v. Chan, 272 A.D.2d 599, 709 N.Y.S.2d 423 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

—In related actions to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs in Action No. 2 appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (R. Goldberg, J.), dated June 18, 1999, which granted the motion of the defendant Wai Jane Chan to vacate a judgment entered against her in that action in the Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County, upon her failure to timely answer the complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

Contrary to the appellants’ contention, the Supreme Court properly vacated the judgment in Action No. 2 entered in the Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County, against the defendant Wai Jane Chan. The Civil Court was without jurisdiction to enter the judgment as the action had been removed to the Supreme Court for a joint trial with Action No. 1 (see, CPLR 602). Bracken, J. P., Sullivan, Altman and McGinity, JJ., concur.

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

—In related actions to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs in Action No. 2 appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (R. Goldberg, J.), dated June 18, 1999, which granted the motion of the defendant Wai Jane Chan to vacate a judgment entered against her in that action in the Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County, upon her failure to timely answer the complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

Contrary to the appellants’ contention, the Supreme Court properly vacated the judgment in Action No. 2 entered in the Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County, against the defendant Wai Jane Chan. The Civil Court was without jurisdiction to enter the judgment as the action had been removed to the Supreme Court for a joint trial with Action No. 1 (see, CPLR 602). Bracken, J. P., Sullivan, Altman and McGinity, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

272 A.D.2d 599, 709 N.Y.S.2d 423, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rodriguez-v-chan-nyappdiv-2000.