Williams v. North Fork Bank & Trust Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Williams v. North Fork Bank & Trust Co.

8 A.D.3d 477, 778 N.Y.S.2d 314, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8430

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

DecidedJune 14, 2004

StatusPublished

This text of 8 A.D.3d 477 (Williams v. North Fork Bank & Trust Co.) 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

Williams v. North Fork Bank & Trust Co., 8 A.D.3d 477, 778 N.Y.S.2d 314, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8430 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action, inter aha, to recover damages for defamation, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Harkavy, J.), dated September 25, 2002, which granted the defendant’s motion to dismiss the complaint as barred by the doctrine of res judicata.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The Supreme Court properly dismissed the action as barred by the doctrine of res judicata (see O’Brien v City of Syracuse, 54 NY2d 353 [1981]).

In light of the foregoing determination, we need not address the defendant’s remaining contentions. Ritter, J.P., Goldstein, Crane and Spolzino, JJ., concur.

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

In an action, inter aha, to recover damages for defamation, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Harkavy, J.), dated September 25, 2002, which granted the defendant’s motion to dismiss the complaint as barred by the doctrine of res judicata.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The Supreme Court properly dismissed the action as barred by the doctrine of res judicata (see O’Brien v City of Syracuse, 54 NY2d 353 [1981]).

In light of the foregoing determination, we need not address the defendant’s remaining contentions. Ritter, J.P., Goldstein, Crane and Spolzino, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

8 A.D.3d 477, 778 N.Y.S.2d 314, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8430, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/williams-v-north-fork-bank-trust-co-nyappdiv-2004.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack