Legal Opinion
Pronti v. Hogan
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided December 27, 2000PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Order unanimously affirmed with costs. Memorandum: In the absence of any showing of confusion or prejudice to defendant, Supreme Court did not err in denying defendant’s motion to strike the summons and complaint on the ground that they were not signed in accordance with the requirement set forth in 22 NYCRR 130-1.la (a) (see, CPLR 2001; cf., Kovilic Constr. Co. v Missbrenner, 106 F3d 768, 772; Price v United States Navy, 39 F3d 1011, 1014-1015; United States v Kasuboski, 834 F2d 1345, 1348-1349). The purposes of the rule are furthered where, as here, the court exercises its discretion to…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Gloria Price v. United States Navy Harry Moses Marguerite Moses (Deceased) Michael Moses Shirley MosesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1994
- Bankr. L. Rep. P 77,252 Kovilic Construction Co., Inc. v. Damir MissbrennerCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1997
3Cited by5 opinions
- Financial Network Investment Corp. v. BeckerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2003
- Green v. TierneyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2009
- Bank of N.Y. Mellon v. SilverbergAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2022
- In re Edward Shapiro, P.C.Civil Court of the City of New York · 2005
- The Fitness Inst., Inc. v. HallacAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2020