Vazem Corp. T/A Paradise Caterers v. Sea & Sky Garden, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Vazem Corp. T/A Paradise Caterers v. Sea & Sky Garden, Inc.

183 A.D.2d 710, 583 N.Y.S.2d 471, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6602

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

DecidedMay 4, 1992

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 183 A.D.2d 710 (Vazem Corp. T/A Paradise Caterers v. Sea & Sky Garden, Inc.) 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

Vazem Corp. T/A Paradise Caterers v. Sea & Sky Garden, Inc., 183 A.D.2d 710, 583 N.Y.S.2d 471, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6602 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

— In an action to recover damages, inter alia, for breach of a lease and a sublease, the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Held, J.), dated June 27, 1990, which denied the plaintiffs’ motion for reargument of the defendants’ motion for summary judgment, which was granted by decision and order of the same court, dated March 29, 1990.

Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, with costs.

A review of the record confirms that the plaintiffs’ motion was "for reargument”. Since the order appealed from denies a motion for reargument (see, Anchor Sav. Bank v Alpha Developers, 143 AD2d 711, 712-713; Matter of Dowling v Bowen, 53 AD2d 862), the appeal must be dismissed (see, Fahey v County of Nassau, 111 AD2d 214). Mangano, P. J., Bracken, Pizzuto and Santucci, JJ., concur.

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

— In an action to recover damages, inter alia, for breach of a lease and a sublease, the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Held, J.), dated June 27, 1990, which denied the plaintiffs’ motion for reargument of the defendants’ motion for summary judgment, which was granted by decision and order of the same court, dated March 29, 1990.

Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, with costs.

A review of the record confirms that the plaintiffs’ motion was "for reargument”. Since the order appealed from denies a motion for reargument (see, Anchor Sav. Bank v Alpha Developers, 143 AD2d 711, 712-713; Matter of Dowling v Bowen, 53 AD2d 862), the appeal must be dismissed (see, Fahey v County of Nassau, 111 AD2d 214). Mangano, P. J., Bracken, Pizzuto and Santucci, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

183 A.D.2d 710, 583 N.Y.S.2d 471, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6602, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/vazem-corp-ta-paradise-caterers-v-sea-sky-garden-inc-nyappdiv-1992.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack