Samuels v. Consolidated Edison Co. of New York, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Samuels v. Consolidated Edison Co. of New York, Inc.

96 A.D.3d 685, 946 N.Y.S.2d 864

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

DecidedJune 28, 2012

StatusPublished

This text of 96 A.D.3d 685 (Samuels v. Consolidated Edison Co. of New York, Inc.) 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

Samuels v. Consolidated Edison Co. of New York, Inc., 96 A.D.3d 685, 946 N.Y.S.2d 864 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2012).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Judith J. Gische, J.), entered June 11, 2010, which granted defendant Consolidated Edison Company of New York’s (Con Ed) oral application to dismiss plaintiffs action against it, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, and the application denied. Appeal from the so-ordered transcript, same court and Justice, entered September 7, 2010, unanimously dismissed, without costs, as moot.

The court improperly heard Con Ed’s pretrial oral application to dismiss plaintiffs complaint. The motion was in substance a motion for summary judgment and as such was untimely (CPLR 3212 [a]; Brill v City of New York, 2 NY3d 648 [2004]). In addition the motion should have been made on papers. Concur— Saxe, J.P., Friedman, Renwick, DeGrasse and Richter, JJ.

Motions to dismiss appeal denied and cross motion to deem the appeal timely granted.

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

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Judith J. Gische, J.), entered June 11, 2010, which granted defendant Consolidated Edison Company of New York’s (Con Ed) oral application to dismiss plaintiffs action against it, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, and the application denied. Appeal from the so-ordered transcript, same court and Justice, entered September 7, 2010, unanimously dismissed, without costs, as moot.

The court improperly heard Con Ed’s pretrial oral application to dismiss plaintiffs complaint. The motion was in substance a motion for summary judgment and as such was untimely (CPLR 3212 [a]; Brill v City of New York, 2 NY3d 648 [2004]). In addition the motion should have been made on papers. Concur— Saxe, J.P., Friedman, Renwick, DeGrasse and Richter, JJ.

Motions to dismiss appeal denied and cross motion to deem the appeal timely granted.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

96 A.D.3d 685, 946 N.Y.S.2d 864, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/samuels-v-consolidated-edison-co-of-new-york-inc-nyappdiv-2012.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack