Westchester Religious Institute v. Kamerman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Westchester Religious Institute v. Kamerman

248 A.D.2d 116, 669 N.Y.S.2d 805, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1918

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

DecidedMarch 3, 1998

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 248 A.D.2d 116 (Westchester Religious Institute v. Kamerman) 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

Westchester Religious Institute v. Kamerman, 248 A.D.2d 116, 669 N.Y.S.2d 805, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1918 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Sheila Abdus-Salaam, J.), entered February 24, 1997, which granted defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint based on laches, unanimously reversed, on the law, with costs, the motion denied and the complaint reinstated.

There has been no showing that defendants were prejudiced by or changed their position in any way due to plaintiffs delay in bringing suit. Nor is there any indication that plaintiffs reluctance to resort to litigation to resolve this internecine dispute was unreasonable under the circumstances. For these reasons, and particularly inasmuch as this is an action for an accounting brought against a fiduciary (see, Matter of Barabash, 31 NY2d 76, 82), the IAS Court’s dismissal of the complaint based on laches was error (see, Dwyer v Mazzola, 171 AD2d 726). Concur — Milonas, J. P., Ellerin, Williams and Tom, JJ.

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

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Sheila Abdus-Salaam, J.), entered February 24, 1997, which granted defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint based on laches, unanimously reversed, on the law, with costs, the motion denied and the complaint reinstated.

There has been no showing that defendants were prejudiced by or changed their position in any way due to plaintiffs delay in bringing suit. Nor is there any indication that plaintiffs reluctance to resort to litigation to resolve this internecine dispute was unreasonable under the circumstances. For these reasons, and particularly inasmuch as this is an action for an accounting brought against a fiduciary (see, Matter of Barabash, 31 NY2d 76, 82), the IAS Court’s dismissal of the complaint based on laches was error (see, Dwyer v Mazzola, 171 AD2d 726). Concur — Milonas, J. P., Ellerin, Williams and Tom, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

248 A.D.2d 116, 669 N.Y.S.2d 805, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1918, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/westchester-religious-institute-v-kamerman-nyappdiv-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack