Seay v. Stateside Construction Corp.

282 A.D.2d 268, 722 N.Y.S.2d 871
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Seay v. Stateside Construction Corp.. Read the opinion of the Court — 273 A.D.2d 60

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Gerald Esposito, J.), entered September 7, 2000, which denied the motion of second third-party defendant Gateway Demolition Corporation to quash the notice vouching Gateway Demolition into the original action, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, and the motion granted.

In an order dated June 8, 2000, this Court affirmed the severance of the second third-party action brought against Gateway Demolition, observing that “[t]he delay in commencing the second third-party action * * * was sufficiently prejudicial, both to plaintiff and Gateway, to support the motion court’s exercise of discretion in granting the motion to sever the second third-party action” (Seay v Stateside Constr. Corp., 273 AD2d 60 [citation omitted]). It having been determined that the second third-party action against Gateway Demolition was untimely because the case was too far advanced, Fuller’s notice vouching in Gateway is equally untimely (see, Cole v Long Is. Light. Co., 14 AD2d 922). Concur — Ellerin, J. P., Wallach, Lerner and Saxe, JJ.

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

Seay v. Stateside Construction Corp., 282 A.D.2d 268, 722 N.Y.S.2d 871 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

282 A.D.2d 268 (Seay v. Stateside Construction Corp.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Cole v. Long Island Lighting Co.
14 A.D.2d 922 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1961)
Seay v. Stateside Construction Corp.
273 A.D.2d 60 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2000)