Legal Opinion
Modica v. Zergebel
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided May 9, 1988PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
The defendants may not appeal from the implied finding by the trial court that the plaintiffs had standing to maintain this action. After a nonjury trial, the trial court dismissed the plaintiffs’ complaint, and therefore the defendants are not aggrieved by that portion of the judgment within the meaning of CPLR 5511 (see, Pennsylvania Gen. Ins. Co. v Austin Powder Co., 68 NY2d 465, 472-473; Del Vecchio v Nassau County, 118 AD2d 615, 616; Rosenberg v Rixon, 111 AD2d 910).
The plaintiffs and the defendants each own property located at the end of a canal in East Islip. The plaintiffs commenced…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Pennsylvania General Insurance v. Austin Powder Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1986
- Orellano v. Samples Tire Equipment & Supply Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1985
- Fresh Pond Road Associates v. Estate of SchachtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1986
- Del Vecchio v. Nassau CountyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1986
- Rosenberg v. RixonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1985
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- BTJ Realty, Inc. v. CaradonnaAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2009
- Bufogle v. GreekAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1989
- Lehrman v. Lake Katonah Club, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2005
- Robinson v. Donald C. Swanson, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1994
- Modica v. ZergebelAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1990