Legal Opinion
Elbaz v. New York City Housing Authority
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided December 27, 2011PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
*987The plaintiff moved for leave to renew and reargue her opposition to the defendant’s motion, contending, inter alia, that the defendant’s motion was premature because discovery was incomplete. In the order appealed from, the Supreme Court granted the plaintiff’s motion, vacated its prior order, and denied the defendant’s motion for summary judgment as premature, finding that “a great amount of discovery remain[ed] to be done.”
The Supreme Court should have denied that branch of the plaintiffs motion which was for leave to renew, as the motion was not based upon new facts or a change in the law…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Lettieri v. CushingAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2011
- Botros v. FlammAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2010
- Weiss v. Fire Extinguisher Services Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2011
- Smith v. City of New YorkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2007
3Cited by5 opinions
- Frenchman v. LynchAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012
- Carrasco v. WeissmanAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2014
- Frenchman v. LynchAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012
- Ural v. Encompass Insurance Co. of AmericaAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012
- Ural v. Encompass Insurance Co. of AmericaAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012