Tinicum Financial Corp. v. Lorch

226 A.D.2d 214, 640 N.Y.S.2d 756, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3891
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedApril 16, 1996
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 226 A.D.2d 214 (Tinicum Financial Corp. v. Lorch) 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
Tinicum Financial Corp. v. Lorch, 226 A.D.2d 214, 640 N.Y.S.2d 756, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3891 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Herman Cahn, J.), entered March 3, 1995, which, in an action pursuant to CPLR 3213 to enforce defendant’s guarantee of a promissory note, granted defendant’s motion to stay the action on the ground of another action pending, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Insofar as the other, earlier commenced action involves [215]*215plaintiffs status as a holder in due course of the note, it puts in issue the enforceability of the note and guarantee sued upon herein, making a stay of the instant action an appropriate exercise of discretion (see, El Greco Inc. v Cohn, 139 AD2d 615, 616). The merits of the defenses to this action will not be considered at this juncture in light of the stay (Koren-DiResta Constr. Co. v Albert B. Ashforth Inc., 100 AD2d 760, 761). Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Milonas, Ellerin, Williams and Mazzarelli, JJ.

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

Related

E D & F Man Sugar Ltd. v. Gellert
2022 NY Slip Op 00813 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2022)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
226 A.D.2d 214, 640 N.Y.S.2d 756, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3891, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tinicum-financial-corp-v-lorch-nyappdiv-1996.