Wrenn v. GSL Enterprises, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Wrenn v. GSL Enterprises, Inc.

238 A.D.2d 247, 656 N.Y.S.2d 870, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4065

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

DecidedApril 22, 1997

StatusPublished

This text of 238 A.D.2d 247 (Wrenn v. GSL Enterprises, 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

Wrenn v. GSL Enterprises, Inc., 238 A.D.2d 247, 656 N.Y.S.2d 870, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4065 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal from order, Supreme Court, New York County (Beverly Cohen, J.), entered April 26, 1996, which granted plaintiffs’ motion to renew a prior order denying their motion to consolidate this action with another pending in Bronx County, and, upon renewal, adhered to the prior order, unanimously dismissed, without costs.

Plaintiff’s motion to renew, which sought reconsideration of their denied motion to consolidate because of clerical mishaps that' prevented the motion court from reading their reply [248]*248papers and entertaining their request for oral argument, was, in effect, a motion to reargue a prior order made after the time to appeal therefrom had expired. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal (see, Grella v Mid-America Realty Investors Ltd. Partnership, 199 AD2d 18). Were we to reach the merits, we would affirm. Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Rosenberger, Wallach, Nardelli and Williams, JJ.

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

—Appeal from order, Supreme Court, New York County (Beverly Cohen, J.), entered April 26, 1996, which granted plaintiffs’ motion to renew a prior order denying their motion to consolidate this action with another pending in Bronx County, and, upon renewal, adhered to the prior order, unanimously dismissed, without costs.

Plaintiff’s motion to renew, which sought reconsideration of their denied motion to consolidate because of clerical mishaps that' prevented the motion court from reading their reply [248]*248papers and entertaining their request for oral argument, was, in effect, a motion to reargue a prior order made after the time to appeal therefrom had expired. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal (see, Grella v Mid-America Realty Investors Ltd. Partnership, 199 AD2d 18). Were we to reach the merits, we would affirm. Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Rosenberger, Wallach, Nardelli and Williams, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

238 A.D.2d 247, 656 N.Y.S.2d 870, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4065, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wrenn-v-gsl-enterprises-inc-nyappdiv-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack