Shiuh Chu Lu v. Conlon

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Shiuh Chu Lu v. Conlon

5 A.D.3d 142, 772 N.Y.S.2d 508, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2263

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

DecidedMarch 4, 2004

StatusPublished

This text of 5 A.D.3d 142 (Shiuh Chu Lu v. Conlon) 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

Shiuh Chu Lu v. Conlon, 5 A.D.3d 142, 772 N.Y.S.2d 508, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2263 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from order, Supreme Court, New York County (Barbara Kapnick, J.), entered on or about March 10, 2003, which, [143]*143inter alia, granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment, deemed to be an appeal from the ensuing judgment, same court and Justice, entered March 31, 2003, dismissing the complaint, and, so considered, the judgment is unanimously affirmed, with costs.

The complaint was properly dismissed as barred by the doctrines of res judicata and collateral estoppel since plaintiffs present claims were fully and fairly litigated and determined against him in prior actions in Kings and Queens Counties (see Buechel v Bain, 97 NY2d 295 [2001], cert denied 535 US 1096 [2002]). The complaint, having been interposed more than three years subsequent to the running of the applicable three-year statutory period (CPLR 214), was also properly dismissed as time-barred. Concur—Nardelli, J.P., Andrias, Sullivan and Lerner, JJ.

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

Appeal from order, Supreme Court, New York County (Barbara Kapnick, J.), entered on or about March 10, 2003, which, [143]*143inter alia, granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment, deemed to be an appeal from the ensuing judgment, same court and Justice, entered March 31, 2003, dismissing the complaint, and, so considered, the judgment is unanimously affirmed, with costs.

The complaint was properly dismissed as barred by the doctrines of res judicata and collateral estoppel since plaintiffs present claims were fully and fairly litigated and determined against him in prior actions in Kings and Queens Counties (see Buechel v Bain, 97 NY2d 295 [2001], cert denied 535 US 1096 [2002]). The complaint, having been interposed more than three years subsequent to the running of the applicable three-year statutory period (CPLR 214), was also properly dismissed as time-barred. Concur—Nardelli, J.P., Andrias, Sullivan and Lerner, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

5 A.D.3d 142, 772 N.Y.S.2d 508, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2263, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/shiuh-chu-lu-v-conlon-nyappdiv-2004.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack