Union Commerce Leasing Corp. v. Kanbar

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Union Commerce Leasing Corp. v. Kanbar

155 A.D.2d 396, 548 N.Y.S.2d 22, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15079

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided November 30, 1989·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

— Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Shirley Fingerhood, J.), entered August 30, 1988, which denied defendant’s motion to vacate the filing of a foreign money judgment entered against him by the United States District Court for Southern Florida, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Since the record establishes that the decision of the United States District Court addressed defendant’s claims, including the motion to stay the enforcement of the judgment, the Supreme Court properly denied defendant’s motion to vacate the filing of the judgment. Collateral attack on the ruling by the United States District Court is not permitted.

It is not necessary to reach the question of the partial satisfaction of the judgment pursuant to a 1985 stipulation since the United States Circuit Court of Appeals recently found no merit to defendant’s claim (Union Commerce Leasing v Kanbar, 873 F2d 299). Since the Federal action fully encompassed the claims defendant now seeks to litigate herein, and the foreign judgment is final, its decision must be afforded full faith and credit by this court (28 USC § 1738). Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Carro, Milonas, Ellerin and Wallach, JJ.

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

— Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Shirley Fingerhood, J.), entered August 30, 1988, which denied defendant’s motion to vacate the filing of a foreign money judgment entered against him by the United States District Court for Southern Florida, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Since the record establishes that the decision of the United States District Court addressed defendant’s claims, including the motion to stay the enforcement of the judgment, the Supreme Court properly denied defendant’s motion to vacate the filing of the judgment. Collateral attack on the ruling by the United States District Court is not permitted.

It is not necessary to reach the question of the partial satisfaction of the judgment pursuant to a 1985 stipulation since the United States Circuit Court of Appeals recently found no merit to defendant’s claim (Union Commerce Leasing v Kanbar, 873 F2d 299). Since the Federal action fully encompassed the claims defendant now seeks to litigate herein, and the foreign judgment is final, its decision must be afforded full faith and credit by this court (28 USC § 1738). Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Carro, Milonas, Ellerin and Wallach, JJ.

Union Commerce Leasing Corp. v. Kanbar, 155 A.D.2d 396, 548 N.Y.S.2d 22, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15079 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1989).

Pincite

155 A.D.2d 396 (Union Commerce Leasing Corp. v. Kanbar) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related