Rosenfeld v. Renika Pty. Ltd.

84 A.D.3d 703, 923 N.Y.S.2d 328
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided May 31, 2011·Published·Cited by 7 cases

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (James A. Yates, J.), entered June 11, 2010, which denied defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint with prejudice as moot in light of plaintiffs’ notice of voluntary discontinuance without prejudice, unanimously reversed, on the law, with costs and the motion granted. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment in defendants’ favor dismissing the complaint.

Plaintiffs’ notice of voluntary discontinuance was untimely under CPLR 3217 (a), and was apparently served to avoid an adverse decision on the pending motion to dismiss the complaint with prejudice (see McMahan v McMahan, 62 AD3d 619, 620 [2009]; Citidress II Corp. v Hinshaw & Culbertson LLP, 59 AD3d 210, 211 [2009]; NBN Broadcasting v Sheridan Broadcasting Networks, 240 AD2d 319 [1997]). Concur — Mazzarelli, J.P, Friedman, Catterson, Manzanet-Daniels and Román, JJ.

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

Rosenfeld v. Renika Pty. Ltd., 84 A.D.3d 703, 923 N.Y.S.2d 328 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2011).

84 A.D.3d 703 (Rosenfeld v. Renika Pty. Ltd.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Matter of Weinman v. New York State Dept. of Motor Vehs.Traffic Violations Bur.
203 A.D.3d 1050 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2022)
Pinkesz Mut. Holdings, LLC v. Pinkesz
2021 NY Slip Op 05358 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2021)
Baez v. Parkway Mobile Homes, Inc.
125 A.D.3d 905 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2015)
BDO USA, LLP v. Phoenix Four, Inc.
113 A.D.3d 507 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2014)
GMAC Mortgage, LLC v. Bisceglie
109 A.D.3d 874 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2013)