Legal Opinion

Nathanson v. Tri-State Constr. LLC

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

Decided February 28, 2008PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Charles E. Ramos, J.), *374entered February 14, 2007, which, to the extent appealed from, denied plaintiff Nathanson’s motion to amend the complaint to add Vaij Associates as a defendant, to consolidate this case with another pending matter, and to impose a constructive trust on the proposed new defendant, affirmed, without costs.

Nathanson failed to demonstrate merit to the proposed amendment (Helene-Harrisson Corp. v Moneyline Networks, 6 AD3d 151 [2004]). In light of our recent affirmance of the dismissal of the case with which Nathanson sought…

Also in this document: Concurrence.

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Hearst Corp. v. ClyneNew York Court of Appeals · 1980
  2. Sharp v. KosmalskiNew York Court of Appeals · 1976
  3. Bell v. MillerCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2007
  4. Helene-Harrisson Corp. v. Moneyline Networks, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2004
  5. Tri State Construction, LLC v. Vaij Realty AssociatesAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2007

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Altschuler v. Jobman 478/480, LLC.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2016
  2. Charles v. SuvannavejhNew York Supreme Court · 2009

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API