Weisburst v. Dreifus

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Weisburst v. Dreifus

89 A.D.3d 536, 932 N.Y.2d 689

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

DecidedNovember 15, 2011

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 89 A.D.3d 536 (Weisburst v. Dreifus) 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

Weisburst v. Dreifus, 89 A.D.3d 536, 932 N.Y.2d 689 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2011).

Pincite

Opinion

The court did not abuse its discretion in finding that defendant’s underlying motion for an emergency stay contained “false charges [against plaintiff] that were expressed by means of a tortured and very partial rendering of the facts that can only have been deliberately crafted to mislead” and was therefore frivolous within the meaning of 22 NYCRR 130-1.1 (see e.g. Rogovin v Rogovin, 27 AD3d 233 [2006]). Concur — Mazzarelli, J.E, Catterson, Moskowitz, Renwick and Abdus-Salaam, JJ.

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

The court did not abuse its discretion in finding that defendant’s underlying motion for an emergency stay contained “false charges [against plaintiff] that were expressed by means of a tortured and very partial rendering of the facts that can only have been deliberately crafted to mislead” and was therefore frivolous within the meaning of 22 NYCRR 130-1.1 (see e.g. Rogovin v Rogovin, 27 AD3d 233 [2006]). Concur — Mazzarelli, J.E, Catterson, Moskowitz, Renwick and Abdus-Salaam, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

89 A.D.3d 536, 932 N.Y.2d 689, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/weisburst-v-dreifus-nyappdiv-2011.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack