Unanue v. Rennert

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Unanue v. Rennert

39 A.D.3d 289, 831 N.Y.S.2d 904

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

DecidedApril 10, 2007

StatusPublished

Cited by16 cases

This text of 39 A.D.3d 289 (Unanue v. Rennert) 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

Unanue v. Rennert, 39 A.D.3d 289, 831 N.Y.S.2d 904 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2007).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from order, Supreme Court, New York County (Jacqueline W. Silbermann, J., upon decision of Ira Gammerman, J.H.O.), entered on or about September 29, 2005, which, sua sponte, dismissed the complaint with prejudice, unanimously dismissed, with costs in favor of defendants-respondents.

[290]*290No appeal as of right lies from a sua sponte order (Sholes v Meagher, 100 NY2d 333, 335 [2003]). If the matter is to he reviewed, plaintiff should move to vacate the sua sponte order (see CPLR 5701 [a] [3]) so as to create a suitable appellate record and afford counsel the opportunity to be heard on the issues (see Davidson v Regan Fund Mgt. Ltd., 15 AD3d 172 [2005]). Concur—Tom, J.P., Marlow, Nardelli, Gonzalez and Kavanagh, JJ.

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

Appeal from order, Supreme Court, New York County (Jacqueline W. Silbermann, J., upon decision of Ira Gammerman, J.H.O.), entered on or about September 29, 2005, which, sua sponte, dismissed the complaint with prejudice, unanimously dismissed, with costs in favor of defendants-respondents.

[290]*290No appeal as of right lies from a sua sponte order (Sholes v Meagher, 100 NY2d 333, 335 [2003]). If the matter is to he reviewed, plaintiff should move to vacate the sua sponte order (see CPLR 5701 [a] [3]) so as to create a suitable appellate record and afford counsel the opportunity to be heard on the issues (see Davidson v Regan Fund Mgt. Ltd., 15 AD3d 172 [2005]). Concur—Tom, J.P., Marlow, Nardelli, Gonzalez and Kavanagh, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

39 A.D.3d 289, 831 N.Y.S.2d 904, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/unanue-v-rennert-nyappdiv-2007.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack