Lunn v. Holiday Corp.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the Court
— Order unanimously affirmed with costs. Memorandum: Defendant Columbia Sussex Corporation and third-party defendant contend that plaintiff’s action is barred by the applicable Statute of Limitations. In Lunn v Holiday Corp. (167 AD2d 818) we concluded that plaintiff’s service of an amended summons and complaint upon defendant was a mere correction of a misnomer (see generally, Simpson v Kenston Warehousing Corp., 154 AD2d 526; Pinto v House, 79 AD2d 361, 364; Covino v Alside Aluminum Supply Co., 42 AD2d 77, 80). The resolution of whether the action was barred by the applicable Statute of…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Simpson v. Kenston Warehousing Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1989
- Covino v. Alside Aluminum Supply Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1973
- Pinto v. HouseAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1981
- McGee v. Bells SupermarketAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1991
- Lunn v. Holiday Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1990
3Cited by2 opinions
- First Wisconsin Trust Co. v. HakimianAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1997
- Foley v. Chase Manhattan Banking Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1995