State v. Vigliotta Bros. Real Estate, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

State v. Vigliotta Bros. Real Estate, Inc.

301 A.D.2d 516, 753 N.Y.S.2d 389, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 160

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

DecidedJanuary 13, 2003

StatusPublished

This text of 301 A.D.2d 516 (State v. Vigliotta Bros. Real Estate, 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

State v. Vigliotta Bros. Real Estate, Inc., 301 A.D.2d 516, 753 N.Y.S.2d 389, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 160 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action pursuant to Navigation Law article 12, the defendants Sun Mark Industries, Inc., Sun Oil Company, Inc., Sun Company, Inc., and Sun Refining and Marketing, Inc., appeal from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Seidell, J.), dated August 21, 2001, as, upon granting the plaintiffs motion to discontinue all causes of action asserted against them, did so “without prejudice.”

Ordered that the order is modified by deleting from the provision thereof granting the plaintiffs motion to discontinue the words “without prejudice,” and substituting therefor the words “with prejudice”; as so modified, the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs to the appellants.

The Supreme Court improvidently exercised its discretion in [517]*517granting the plaintiffs motion to discontinue all causes of action asserted against the appellants “without prejudice” (see Brenhouse v Anthony Indus., 156 AD2d 411; Valladares v Valladares, 80 AD2d 244, affd 55 NY2d 388). Krausman, J.P., Goldstein, Townes and Rivera, JJ., concur.

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

—In an action pursuant to Navigation Law article 12, the defendants Sun Mark Industries, Inc., Sun Oil Company, Inc., Sun Company, Inc., and Sun Refining and Marketing, Inc., appeal from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Seidell, J.), dated August 21, 2001, as, upon granting the plaintiffs motion to discontinue all causes of action asserted against them, did so “without prejudice.”

Ordered that the order is modified by deleting from the provision thereof granting the plaintiffs motion to discontinue the words “without prejudice,” and substituting therefor the words “with prejudice”; as so modified, the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs to the appellants.

The Supreme Court improvidently exercised its discretion in [517]*517granting the plaintiffs motion to discontinue all causes of action asserted against the appellants “without prejudice” (see Brenhouse v Anthony Indus., 156 AD2d 411; Valladares v Valladares, 80 AD2d 244, affd 55 NY2d 388). Krausman, J.P., Goldstein, Townes and Rivera, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

301 A.D.2d 516, 753 N.Y.S.2d 389, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 160, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-vigliotta-bros-real-estate-inc-nyappdiv-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack