Wadsworth Avenue Associates, L.P. v. Maynard

23 A.D.3d 302, 803 N.Y.S.2d 909

This text of 23 A.D.3d 302 (Wadsworth Avenue Associates, L.P. v. Maynard) 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
Wadsworth Avenue Associates, L.P. v. Maynard, 23 A.D.3d 302, 803 N.Y.S.2d 909 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2005).

Opinion

Appeal from order, Supreme Court, New York County (Rolando T. Acosta, J.), entered on or about November 19, 2004, which, in an action by a limited partner against a general partner of a certain partnership, inter alia, denied plaintiffs motion for summary judgment removing defendant as general partner, unanimously dismissed, with costs in favor of defendant, payable by plaintiff.

The interlocutory order and judgment denying plaintiffs motion for summary judgment is no longer reviewable on direct appeal, a final, unappealed judgment having since been entered on May 23, 2005 disposing of the action (see Kirby v Turner Constr. Co., 286 AD2d 618 [2001]). Were the appeal properly before us, we would find it to be without merit. There was no evidentiary support for plaintiff’s claim that defendant had committed theft. Concur—Saxe, J.P., Marlow, Ellerin, Gonzalez and McGuire, JJ.

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

Related

Kirby v. Turner Construction Co.
286 A.D.2d 618 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2001)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
23 A.D.3d 302, 803 N.Y.S.2d 909, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wadsworth-avenue-associates-lp-v-maynard-nyappdiv-2005.