Susi Contracting Co. v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Susi Contracting Co. v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co.

180 A.D.2d 610, 580 N.Y.S.2d 322, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2903

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

DecidedFebruary 27, 1992

StatusPublished

This text of 180 A.D.2d 610 (Susi Contracting Co. v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co.) 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

Susi Contracting Co. v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co., 180 A.D.2d 610, 580 N.Y.S.2d 322, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2903 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Martin B. Stecher, J.), entered June 5, 1991, which, insofar as appealed from, denied plaintiff’s cross motion to enjoin defendant from bringing further proceedings before the Connecticut Superior Court for the purpose of determining whether that court had jurisdiction over plaintiff in a 1984 interpleader action, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Inasmuch as the order on appeal enjoins defendant from seeking any injunctive relief, “except in this Court or on [611]*611appeal from this order,” prohibiting plaintiff from enforcing the New York County judgment, and since the IAS court granted the parties “leave to renew when circumstances warrant”, plaintiff is not aggrieved by the order on appeal, and thus may not appeal from it (CPLR 5511). Nor is there anything in the IAS court’s decision at variance with this court’s prior pronouncement (Susi Contr. Co. v Hartford Acc. & Indem. Co., 172 AD2d 255, lv denied 78 NY2d 984), that the Connecticut court lacks jurisdiction over plaintiff because of improper service. Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Carro, Rosenberger, Wallach and Rubin, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Martin B. Stecher, J.), entered June 5, 1991, which, insofar as appealed from, denied plaintiff’s cross motion to enjoin defendant from bringing further proceedings before the Connecticut Superior Court for the purpose of determining whether that court had jurisdiction over plaintiff in a 1984 interpleader action, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Inasmuch as the order on appeal enjoins defendant from seeking any injunctive relief, “except in this Court or on [611]*611appeal from this order,” prohibiting plaintiff from enforcing the New York County judgment, and since the IAS court granted the parties “leave to renew when circumstances warrant”, plaintiff is not aggrieved by the order on appeal, and thus may not appeal from it (CPLR 5511). Nor is there anything in the IAS court’s decision at variance with this court’s prior pronouncement (Susi Contr. Co. v Hartford Acc. & Indem. Co., 172 AD2d 255, lv denied 78 NY2d 984), that the Connecticut court lacks jurisdiction over plaintiff because of improper service. Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Carro, Rosenberger, Wallach and Rubin, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

180 A.D.2d 610, 580 N.Y.S.2d 322, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2903, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/susi-contracting-co-v-hartford-accident-indemnity-co-nyappdiv-1992.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack