Mohssen v. Gonzalez
The Second Department dismissed an appeal from a summary judgment order because the appellant failed to include the majority of the motion papers in the appellate record, making meaningful review impossible.
The Second Department dismissed an appeal from a summary judgment order because the appellant failed to include the majority of the motion papers in the appellate record, making meaningful review impossible.
The Second Department vacated a Supreme Court order dismissing an Article 78 proceeding naming a Justice as respondent, holding the proceeding should have been commenced in the Appellate Division.
The Second Department affirmed denial of a motion to vacate dismissal of a medical malpractice action, finding the plaintiff failed to demonstrate a reasonable excuse for not appearing at a court conference.
The Second Department affirmed denial of enhanced sanctions against plaintiffs who voluntarily discontinued a personal injury action, finding no showing of frivolous conduct under 22 NYCRR 130-1.1.
The Second Department reversed a preliminary injunction and vacated a sua sponte declaration that a lease had terminated, finding no motion for summary judgment was pending and no irreparable harm was shown.
The Second Department reversed a default judgment quieting title, finding that ‘nail and mail’ service under CPLR 308(4) was improper where the plaintiff failed to exercise due diligence.
Appellate Division reverses, granting motion to conform medical malpractice pleadings to evidence developed during discovery regarding phacoemulsification surgery injuries.
Appellate Division reverses denial of leave to amend answer, holding that mere delay without demonstrated prejudice is insufficient to bar amendment under CPLR 3025(b).
Appellate Division affirms striking of jury demand, finding action was primarily equitable in nature despite incidental demand for monetary damages.
Appellate Division affirms denial of motion to vacate note of issue for additional discovery including tax returns, finding defendants failed to show necessity.