Legal Opinion
Ross v. Keon
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided April 22, 1985PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
No procedural error occurred in treating the aforenoted branch of plaintiffs’ cross motion as one for summary judgment. Plaintiffs’ notice of cross motion clearly indicated that they were seeking summary judgment pursuant to CPLR 3211 (c) and defendants submitted answering affidavits. In such circumstances, Special Term was not required to notify defendants before ruling on the cross motion (see, O’Hara v Del Bello, 47 NY2d 363, 367-368; Pollnow v Poughkeepsie Newspapers, 107 AD2d 10, 16, n 4; Goldstein v County of Monroe, 77 AD2d 232, 234; Monteferrante v New York City Fire Dept., 63 AD2d…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- O'HARA v. Del BelloNew York Court of Appeals · 1979
- Goldstein v. County of MonroeAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1980
- Pollnow v. Poughkeepsie Newspapers, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1985
- Monteferrante v. New York City Fire DepartmentNew York Court of Appeals · 1979
- Monteferrante v. New York City Fire DepartmentAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1978
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Reed v. Shoratlantic Development Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1986
- Marshall v. RomanoAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1988