Sergio v. Elmhurst Gardens, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Sergio v. Elmhurst Gardens, Inc.

8 A.D.3d 489, 778 N.Y.S.2d 309, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8433

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

DecidedJune 14, 2004

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 8 A.D.3d 489 (Sergio v. Elmhurst Gardens, Inc.) 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

Sergio v. Elmhurst Gardens, Inc., 8 A.D.3d 489, 778 N.Y.S.2d 309, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8433 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

In a proceeding, inter alia, to enjoin the respondent Dime Savings Bank of New York, FSB, from conducting a foreclosure sale pursuant to Uniform Commercial Code article 9, the petitioner appeals, as limited by her brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (O’Donoghue, J.), dated October 4, 2002, as denied her motion for a preliminary injunction to stay a foreclosure sale, inter alia, of her 290 shares of stock in Elmhurst Gardens, Inc.

Ordered that the appeal is dismissed as academic, with one bill of costs to the respondents appearing separately and filing separate briefs.

[490]*490The petitioner appeals, as limited by her brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, as denied her motion for a preliminary injunction to stay a foreclosure sale, inter alia, of her 290 shares of stock in Elmhurst Gardens, Inc. The appeal is academic, because the foreclosure sale occurred after issuance of the order appealed from. Prudenti, P.J., Ritter, H. Miller and Crane, JJ., concur.

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

In a proceeding, inter alia, to enjoin the respondent Dime Savings Bank of New York, FSB, from conducting a foreclosure sale pursuant to Uniform Commercial Code article 9, the petitioner appeals, as limited by her brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (O’Donoghue, J.), dated October 4, 2002, as denied her motion for a preliminary injunction to stay a foreclosure sale, inter alia, of her 290 shares of stock in Elmhurst Gardens, Inc.

Ordered that the appeal is dismissed as academic, with one bill of costs to the respondents appearing separately and filing separate briefs.

[490]*490The petitioner appeals, as limited by her brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, as denied her motion for a preliminary injunction to stay a foreclosure sale, inter alia, of her 290 shares of stock in Elmhurst Gardens, Inc. The appeal is academic, because the foreclosure sale occurred after issuance of the order appealed from. Prudenti, P.J., Ritter, H. Miller and Crane, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

8 A.D.3d 489, 778 N.Y.S.2d 309, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8433, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sergio-v-elmhurst-gardens-inc-nyappdiv-2004.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack