Caryl S. v. Child & Adolescent Treatment Services, Inc.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the Court
—Order unanimously affirmed with costs. Memorandum: In May 1994 Supreme Court denied defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a cause of action (Caryl S. v Child & Adolescent Treatment Servs., 161 Misc 2d 563). Two years later, defendants moved for renewal on the ground that one of the cases cited in the court’s decision, W. C. W. v Bird (840 SW2d 50 [Ct App Tex]), had been reversed on appeal (Bird v W.C.W., 868 SW2d 767 [Sup Ct Tex]). The court properly exercised its discretion in denying the motion. Although a motion to renew may be "based upon law not previously…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Bird v. W.C.W.Texas Supreme Court · 1994
- Olean Urban Renewal Agency v. HermanAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1984
- Caryl S. v. Child & Adolescent Treatment Services, Inc.New York Supreme Court · 1994
- Johnston v. National Railroad Passenger Corp. (Amtrak)Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1990
3Cited by2 opinions
- Washington Apts., L.P. v. Oetiker, Inc.New York Supreme Court · 2013
- East Aurora Coop. Mkt., Inc. v. Red Brick Plaza LLCAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2021