Sandcham Realty Corp. v. Taub

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Sandcham Realty Corp. v. Taub

266 A.D.2d 117, 698 N.Y.S.2d 146

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

DecidedNovember 23, 1999

StatusPublished

This text of 266 A.D.2d 117 (Sandcham Realty Corp. v. Taub) 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

Sandcham Realty Corp. v. Taub, 266 A.D.2d 117, 698 N.Y.S.2d 146 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Jane Solomon, J.), entered September 30, 1998, which, in an action by plaintiff clients against defendant attorneys for fraud, insofar as appealed from, denied defendants’ motion to strike portions of the complaint as scandalous or prejudicial, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Paragraphs 3, 30-32, and 36-42 of the complaint, alleging various incidents of improper conduct by defendants during their long-term representation of plaintiffs, while directed primarily to the five dismissed causes of action, are also relevant to the sixth cause of action for fraud left standing in the prior order, and therefore should not be stricken (see, Miglio v Miglio, 147 AD2d 460). Although some of the allegations contained in paragraphs 4, 8, and 45-47 are irrelevant to the sixth cause of action, they contain no matter that can possibly be considered as scandalous or prejudicial. Concur — Ellerin, P. J., Rosenberger, Tom, Andrias and Buckley, JJ.

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

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Jane Solomon, J.), entered September 30, 1998, which, in an action by plaintiff clients against defendant attorneys for fraud, insofar as appealed from, denied defendants’ motion to strike portions of the complaint as scandalous or prejudicial, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Paragraphs 3, 30-32, and 36-42 of the complaint, alleging various incidents of improper conduct by defendants during their long-term representation of plaintiffs, while directed primarily to the five dismissed causes of action, are also relevant to the sixth cause of action for fraud left standing in the prior order, and therefore should not be stricken (see, Miglio v Miglio, 147 AD2d 460). Although some of the allegations contained in paragraphs 4, 8, and 45-47 are irrelevant to the sixth cause of action, they contain no matter that can possibly be considered as scandalous or prejudicial. Concur — Ellerin, P. J., Rosenberger, Tom, Andrias and Buckley, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

266 A.D.2d 117, 698 N.Y.S.2d 146, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sandcham-realty-corp-v-taub-nyappdiv-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack