Simon v. Nortrax N.E., LLC

44 A.D.3d 1027, 845 N.Y.S.2d 85
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedOctober 30, 2007
StatusPublished
Cited by7 cases

This text of 44 A.D.3d 1027 (Simon v. Nortrax N.E., LLC) 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
Simon v. Nortrax N.E., LLC, 44 A.D.3d 1027, 845 N.Y.S.2d 85 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2007).

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendant A. Montano Company, Inc., appeals, as limited by its brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (LaCava, J.), entered August 17, 2006, as denied that branch of its motion which was “for a declaration that this action was commenced on September 21, 2005.”

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

“The courts of New York do not issue advisory opinions for the fundamental reason that in this State ‘[t]he giving of such opinions is not the exercise of the judicial function’ ” (Cuomo v Long Is. Light. Co., 71 NY2d 349, 354 [1988], quoting Self-Insurer’s Assn. v State Indus. Commn., 224 NY 13, 16 [1918]). Thus, courts may not issue judicial decisions which “can have no immediate effect and may never resolve anything” (New York Pub. Interest Research Group v Carey, 42 NY2d 527, 531 [1977]). Here, the appellant moved, inter alia, for a declaration that this action was commenced on September 21, 2005 to determine the viability of a potential defense based upon the enactment of the Transportation Equity Act of 2005 (49 USCA § 30106), which went into effect on August 10, 2005. Under these circumstances, that branch of the appellant’s motion which was for an order declaring the date of commencement of the action constituted, in essence, an impermissible request for an advisory opinion. Since the appellant was not entitled to such relief, the Supreme Court properly denied that branch of its motion. Spolzino, J.P., Krausman, Fisher and Angiolillo, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Matter of Hudson
2024 NY Slip Op 24251 (New York Supreme Court, Kings County, 2024)
Chunyin Li v. Joffe
210 A.D.3d 737 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2022)
U.S. Bank Natl. Assn. v. McCaffery
2020 NY Slip Op 04805 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2020)
Board of Educ. of Palmyra-Macedon Cent. Sch. Dist. v. Flower City Glass Co., Inc.
2018 NY Slip Op 3056 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2018)
State v. Mercado
50 Misc. 3d 512 (New York Supreme Court, 2015)
State v. Maurice G.
32 Misc. 3d 380 (New York Supreme Court, 2011)
Hirschfeld v. Hogan
60 A.D.3d 728 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2009)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
44 A.D.3d 1027, 845 N.Y.S.2d 85, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/simon-v-nortrax-ne-llc-nyappdiv-2007.