Legal Opinion

Kerner v. Kerner

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

Decided June 18, 1999No. Appeal No. 5Published

1Opinion of the Court

—Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: We exercise our discretion to treat the appeal, taken from the decision, as taken from the order (see, CPLR 5520 [c]; Progressive Ins. Co. v Rudd Spray Serv., 236 AD2d 874). Supreme Court properly denied defendant’s motion for postjudgment relief. Insofar as the motion may be viewed as one pursuant to CPLR 4404 (b), we conclude that it was untimely (see, CPLR 4405; Casey v Slattery, 213 AD2d 890, 891; Bertan v Richmond Mem. Hosp. & Health Ctr., 131 AD2d 799, 800-801). Insofar as the motion may be viewed as one to vacate the judgment…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Casey v. SlatteryAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1995
  2. Commercial Structures, Inc. v. City of SyracuseAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1983
  3. Bertan v. Richmond Memorial Hospital & Health CenterAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1987
  4. Progressive Insurance v. Rudd Spray Service, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1997

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

Powered by the Exa API