Tinicum Financial Corp. v. Lorch

226 A.D.2d 214, 640 N.Y.S.2d 756, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3891
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided April 16, 1996·Published·Cited by 2 cases

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] plaintiffs 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

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).

226 A.D.2d 214 (Tinicum Financial Corp. v. Lorch) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

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