From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Glantz v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jan 16, 1986
116 A.D.2d 498 (N.Y. App. Div. 1986)

Opinion

January 16, 1986

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Burton S. Sherman, J.).


The situation presented here is virtually identical to that involved in Adventurers Whitestone Corp. v City of New York ( 65 N.Y.2d 83), wherein the Court of Appeals concluded that the claimant was precluded from litigating in a second action an issue which it could have raised in the condemnation proceeding. Consequently, defendant's motion to dismiss the complaint should be granted.

Concur — Sandler, J.P., Milonas, Kassal, Rosenberger and Ellerin, JJ.


Summaries of

Glantz v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jan 16, 1986
116 A.D.2d 498 (N.Y. App. Div. 1986)
Case details for

Glantz v. City of New York

Case Details

Full title:HAROLD GLANTZ et al., Doing Business as H.G.V. ASSOCIATES, et al.…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: Jan 16, 1986

Citations

116 A.D.2d 498 (N.Y. App. Div. 1986)

Citing Cases

In Matter of City of New York

The Law "Under usual principles of claim preclusion, plaintiff is barred from raising in a second action an…

Balfour Concessions, Ltd. v. City of N.Y

As in Adventurers Whitestone (supra, p 91), plaintiff herein "neither raised the question of the rate of…