Sutherland v. Young

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Sutherland v. Young

54 A.D.2d 562, 386 N.Y.S.2d 1013, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13884

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

DecidedSeptember 20, 1976

StatusPublished

This text of 54 A.D.2d 562 (Sutherland v. Young) 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

Sutherland v. Young, 54 A.D.2d 562, 386 N.Y.S.2d 1013, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13884 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1976).

Pincite

Opinion

In a wrongful death action, plaintiff appeals (1) from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated May 30, 1975, as granted the attorneys for the third-party defendant leave to withdraw with respect to the third-party plaintiffs first cause of action and (2) as limited by her notice of appeal and brief, from so much of a further order of the same court, dated October 14, 1975, as, upon reargument, adhered to the original determination with respect to the third-party plaintiffs first cause of action. Appeal from the order dated May 30, 1975 dismissed as academic. That order.was superseded by the order made on reargument. Order dated October 14, 1975 affirmed insofar as appealed from. Third-party defendant-respondent is awarded one bill of costs to cover both appeals. In view of the facts presented herein, the disclaimer by the insurer was timely. Gulotta, P. J., Hopkins, Latham, Cohalan and Hawkins, JJ., concur.

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

In a wrongful death action, plaintiff appeals (1) from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated May 30, 1975, as granted the attorneys for the third-party defendant leave to withdraw with respect to the third-party plaintiffs first cause of action and (2) as limited by her notice of appeal and brief, from so much of a further order of the same court, dated October 14, 1975, as, upon reargument, adhered to the original determination with respect to the third-party plaintiffs first cause of action. Appeal from the order dated May 30, 1975 dismissed as academic. That order.was superseded by the order made on reargument. Order dated October 14, 1975 affirmed insofar as appealed from. Third-party defendant-respondent is awarded one bill of costs to cover both appeals. In view of the facts presented herein, the disclaimer by the insurer was timely. Gulotta, P. J., Hopkins, Latham, Cohalan and Hawkins, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

54 A.D.2d 562, 386 N.Y.S.2d 1013, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13884, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sutherland-v-young-nyappdiv-1976.