Scarborough v. Zimmon

437 N.E.2d 1157, 56 N.Y.2d 784, 452 N.Y.S.2d 400, 1982 N.Y. LEXIS 3435
New York Court of Appeals·Decided May 20, 1982·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

On review of submissions pursuant to rule 500.2 (b) of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.2 [b]), order affirmed, with costs. It cannot be said, as a matter of law, that the Appellate Division abused its discretion in granting respondent’s motion to dismiss the complaint as against it pursuant to CPLR 3012 (subd [b]) (see, e.g., Barasch v Micucci, 49 NY2d 594).

Concur: Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Meyer.

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

Scarborough v. Zimmon, 437 N.E.2d 1157, 56 N.Y.2d 784, 452 N.Y.S.2d 400, 1982 N.Y. LEXIS 3435 (N.Y. 1982).

437 N.E.2d 1157 (Scarborough v. Zimmon) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Scarborough v. Zimmon
453 N.E.2d 530 (New York Court of Appeals, 1983)
Corrado v. Bendell
93 A.D.2d 876 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1983)
Tonello v. Carborundum Co.
91 A.D.2d 1169 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1983)
Migliaccio v. Phoenix Insurance
91 A.D.2d 821 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1982)
Scarborough v. Zimmon
90 A.D.2d 989 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1982)