Legal Opinion

Bikman v. 595 Broadway Associates

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

Decided October 4, 2011PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Plaintiff cannot show a meritorious cause of action, as required to vacate her default, because her claims have been fully litigated in prior proceedings and the doctrine of res judicata bars her from relitigating them (see O’Brien v City of Syracuse, 54 NY2d 353, 357 [1981]). Furthermore, given plaintiffs history of frivolous litigation, the court properly enjoined her from bringing any further actions against defend*456ant relating to these claims without court approval (see e.g. Matter of Sud v Sud, 227 AD2d 319 [1996]).

We have reviewed plaintiffs remaining contentions and find them without…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. O'Brien v. City of SyracuseNew York Court of Appeals · 1981
  2. Sud v. SudAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1996

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Lipin v. Danske BankAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2015
  2. Lipin v. HuntAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2016
  3. Wiltz v. New York CityAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2021
  4. Wiltz v. New York CityAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2021
  5. AARISMAA, IV, JAAN A., MTR. OFAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2014

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API