Sciolto v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Sciolto v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.

106 A.D.2d 622, 484 N.Y.S.2d 1015, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 21604

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided December 31, 1984·Published

Opinion

In an action pursuant to former section 167 (subd 1, par [b]) of the Insurance Law (now Insurance Law, § 3420, subd [a], par [2]), defendant appeals from (1) an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Pizzuto, J.), dated September 30, 1983, which granted plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment and denied defendant’s cross motion for a stay of the proceedings pending determination of an appeal; and [623]*623(2) a judgment of the same court, dated October 24, 1983, which awarded plaintiffs $77,517.67.

Appeal from the order dismissed, without costs or disbursements (Matter of Aho, 39 NY2d 241, 248).

Judgment affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

Defendant’s arguments on appeal, including its argument regarding the entry of judgment in the declaratory judgment action, were not raised at Special Term and we decline to consider them on appeal. Therefore, the judgment appealed from should be affirmed. Lazer, J. P., Brown, Boyers and Eiber, JJ., concur.

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

In an action pursuant to former section 167 (subd 1, par [b]) of the Insurance Law (now Insurance Law, § 3420, subd [a], par [2]), defendant appeals from (1) an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Pizzuto, J.), dated September 30, 1983, which granted plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment and denied defendant’s cross motion for a stay of the proceedings pending determination of an appeal; and [623]*623(2) a judgment of the same court, dated October 24, 1983, which awarded plaintiffs $77,517.67.

Appeal from the order dismissed, without costs or disbursements (Matter of Aho, 39 NY2d 241, 248).

Judgment affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

Defendant’s arguments on appeal, including its argument regarding the entry of judgment in the declaratory judgment action, were not raised at Special Term and we decline to consider them on appeal. Therefore, the judgment appealed from should be affirmed. Lazer, J. P., Brown, Boyers and Eiber, JJ., concur.

Sciolto v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co., 106 A.D.2d 622, 484 N.Y.S.2d 1015, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 21604 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1984).

Pincite

106 A.D.2d 622 (Sciolto v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related