Wilhelm Group v. White Plains Flooring & Supplies, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Wilhelm Group v. White Plains Flooring & Supplies, Inc.

2 A.D.3d 438, 767 N.Y.S.2d 836

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

DecidedDecember 1, 2003

StatusPublished

This text of 2 A.D.3d 438 (Wilhelm Group v. White Plains Flooring & Supplies, 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

Wilhelm Group v. White Plains Flooring & Supplies, Inc., 2 A.D.3d 438, 767 N.Y.S.2d 836 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for breach of a commercial [439]*439lease, the defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Rudolph, J.), dated November 18, 2002, which denied their motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

Under the circumstances of this case, the Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in denying the defendants’ belated motion for summary judgment as untimely (see CPLR 3212 [a]; Olzaski v Locust Val. Cent. School Dist., 256 AD2d 320 [1998]; cf. Chambers v Maury Povich Show, 285 AD2d 440 [2001]). Ritter, J.P., Florio, Smith and H. Miller, JJ., concur.

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

—In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for breach of a commercial [439]*439lease, the defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Rudolph, J.), dated November 18, 2002, which denied their motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

Under the circumstances of this case, the Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in denying the defendants’ belated motion for summary judgment as untimely (see CPLR 3212 [a]; Olzaski v Locust Val. Cent. School Dist., 256 AD2d 320 [1998]; cf. Chambers v Maury Povich Show, 285 AD2d 440 [2001]). Ritter, J.P., Florio, Smith and H. Miller, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2 A.D.3d 438, 767 N.Y.S.2d 836, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wilhelm-group-v-white-plains-flooring-supplies-inc-nyappdiv-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack