Legal Opinion
Spillman v. City of Rochester
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided July 10, 1987PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Motion to vacate automatic stay denied as unnecessary. Memorandum: The motion of the *1009defendant City of Rochester to dismiss plaintiff’s complaint was denied and the city appealed. Plaintiff now moves before us to vacate what it perceives to be an automatic stay effected by the city’s appeal pursuant to CPLR 5519 (a) (1). Plaintiff contends that vacating the stay is necessary to compel the city to answer the complaint; that pursuant to CPLR 3211 (f), the city’s time to answer has been extended until 10 days after the service of notice of entry of the order denying the motion to dismiss the…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- De Crosta v. A. Reynolds Construction & Supply Corp.New York Court of Appeals · 1977
- Gordon v. Town of EsopusAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1985
- Christian v. Village of HerkimerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1957
- Christian v. Village of HerkimerNew York Court of Appeals · 1958
- Dublanica v. Rome Hospital/Murphy Memorial HospitalAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1987
3Cited by4 opinions
- Pokoik v. Department of Health Services of County of SuffolkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1996
- Shorten v. City of White PlainsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1995
- Crandall v. Town of MentzAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2002
- Fassl v. New York State Department of Taxation & FinanceAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1990