Legal Opinion · Dissent

Maio v. Gardino

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

Decided December 23, 1999Published

1Dissent

Mikoll, J. P.

(dissenting). I respectfully dissent.

A fair reading of plaintiffs’ complaint under the relaxed standards governing CPLR 3211 dismissal motions supports plaintiffs’ position that the purpose of the action is to enforce their judgment by setting aside the claimed fraudulent conveyance or, alternatively, permitting them to attach the payments received by defendants Lois Lansing and Jean Adams thereunder. The majority holds, however, that even if plaintiffs’ action is viewed as one to enforce a money judgment, it is time barred. I disagree.

The fact that the equitable relief sought by…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Altman v. FinkelAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1945
  2. Altman v. FinkelNew York Court of Appeals · 1945
  3. Siegman v. RosenAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1998

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

Powered by the Exa API