Schaffer v. Landolfo

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Schaffer v. Landolfo

27 A.D.3d 812, 810 N.Y.S.2d 538

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

DecidedMarch 2, 2006

StatusPublished

Cited by6 cases

This text of 27 A.D.3d 812 (Schaffer v. Landolfo) 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

Schaffer v. Landolfo, 27 A.D.3d 812, 810 N.Y.S.2d 538 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2006).

Pincite

Opinion

Carpinello, J.

Appeals (1) from an order and amended order of the Supreme Court (Williams, J.), entered July 1, 2005 in Saratoga County, which granted plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction, and (2) from an order of said court, entered September 28, 2005 in Saratoga County, which denied defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint.

Among other requested relief, plaintiffs seek a determination concerning their claims to a particular right of way to the shore of Lake Nancy in Saratoga County. However, plaintiffs concede that they failed to join necessary parties, namely, various property owners with rights to the same right of way. Since all necessary parties have not been joined, defendants’ motion to dismiss on this ground should have been granted (see Hitchcock v Boyack, 256 AD2d 842, 844 [1998]; see also CPLR 1001 [a]; 1003).

Spain, J.P., Mugglin, Rose and Lahtinen, JJ., concur. Ordered that the orders and amended order are reversed, on the law, with costs, plaintiffs’ motion denied, defendants’ motion granted and complaint dismissed.

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

Carpinello, J.

Appeals (1) from an order and amended order of the Supreme Court (Williams, J.), entered July 1, 2005 in Saratoga County, which granted plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction, and (2) from an order of said court, entered September 28, 2005 in Saratoga County, which denied defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint.

Among other requested relief, plaintiffs seek a determination concerning their claims to a particular right of way to the shore of Lake Nancy in Saratoga County. However, plaintiffs concede that they failed to join necessary parties, namely, various property owners with rights to the same right of way. Since all necessary parties have not been joined, defendants’ motion to dismiss on this ground should have been granted (see Hitchcock v Boyack, 256 AD2d 842, 844 [1998]; see also CPLR 1001 [a]; 1003).

Spain, J.P., Mugglin, Rose and Lahtinen, JJ., concur. Ordered that the orders and amended order are reversed, on the law, with costs, plaintiffs’ motion denied, defendants’ motion granted and complaint dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

27 A.D.3d 812, 810 N.Y.S.2d 538, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/schaffer-v-landolfo-nyappdiv-2006.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack