Wassertheil v. Elburg, LLC

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Wassertheil v. Elburg, LLC

94 A.D.3d 754, 941 N.Y.S.2d 514

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

DecidedApril 3, 2012

StatusPublished

This text of 94 A.D.3d 754 (Wassertheil v. Elburg, LLC) 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

Wassertheil v. Elburg, LLC, 94 A.D.3d 754, 941 N.Y.S.2d 514 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2012).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Spodek, J.), dated June 29, 2011, as denied that branch of his motion which was for leave to renew his prior motion to enter a judgment against the defendant Encore Development, Inc., upon that defendant’s default in appearing and answering the complaint, which had been denied in an order of the same court dated August 23, 2010.

[755]*755Ordered that the appeal is dismissed as academic, without costs or disbursements, in light of our determination in the companion appeal (see Wassertheil v Elburg, LLC, 94 AD3d 753 [2012] [decided herewith]). Rivera, J.P, Leventhal, Roman and Cohen, JJ., concur.

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

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Spodek, J.), dated June 29, 2011, as denied that branch of his motion which was for leave to renew his prior motion to enter a judgment against the defendant Encore Development, Inc., upon that defendant’s default in appearing and answering the complaint, which had been denied in an order of the same court dated August 23, 2010.

[755]*755Ordered that the appeal is dismissed as academic, without costs or disbursements, in light of our determination in the companion appeal (see Wassertheil v Elburg, LLC, 94 AD3d 753 [2012] [decided herewith]). Rivera, J.P, Leventhal, Roman and Cohen, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

94 A.D.3d 754, 941 N.Y.S.2d 514, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wassertheil-v-elburg-llc-nyappdiv-2012.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack