Legal Opinion
Peterkin v. City of New York
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided June 24, 2002PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Cozier, J.
The issue raised on this appeal is whether the plaintiffs supplemental summons and complaint comply with CPLR 1003 and 3025 (b). For the reasons stated herein, we find that the supplemental summons and complaint do not comply with CPLR 1003 and 3025 (b) to the extent that they were served without leave of court and in the absence of a stipulation containing the signature of JMA Concrete Co., Inc., consenting to its joinder in the main action.
On March 14, 1997, the plaintiff was injured while transporting construction materials to a lot owned by the defendants…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Camacho v. New York City Transit AuthorityAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1985
- Galatti v. Alliance Funding Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1996
- Yonker v. Amol Motorcycles, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1990
- Pinkston v. WeissAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1997
- Cooky's Island Steak Pub, Inc. v. Yorkville Electric Co.New York Supreme Court · 1986
3Cited by10 opinions
- Mennerich v. EspositoAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2004
- Petracca v. PetraccaAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2003
- Mirza v. Metropolitan Life InsuranceAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2003
- Jaramillo v. AsconcioAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2017
- Nikolic v. Federation Employment & Guidance Service, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2005
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.