From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Lavi v. Old Cedar Development Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 5, 2001
281 A.D.2d 397 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)

Opinion

Submitted January 24, 2001.

March 5, 2001.

In an action, inter alia, for specific performance of an agreement to transfer shares of stock, the defendants Old Cedar Development Corp. and Jamshid Lavi appeal from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Costello, J.), dated July 24, 2000, as, upon their motion pursuant to CPLR 3216 to dismiss the complaint insofar as asserted against them, directed a conference.

Beck, Gewurz Strauss, PLLC, Garden City, N.Y. (Leland Stuart Beck of counsel), for appellants.

Dollinger, Gonski Grossman, Carle Place, N.Y. (Michael J. Spithogiannis of counsel), for respondent.

Before: CORNELIUS J. O'BRIEN, J.P., WILLIAM D. FRIEDMANN, GLORIA GOLDSTEIN, NANCY E. SMITH, JJ.


DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the appeal is dismissed, without costs or disbursements.

The appeal must be dismissed as the order appealed from did not decide the motion, but left it pending and undecided (see, Katz v. Katz, 68 A.D.2d 536).


Summaries of

Lavi v. Old Cedar Development Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 5, 2001
281 A.D.2d 397 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)
Case details for

Lavi v. Old Cedar Development Corp.

Case Details

Full title:PARVIZ LAVI, RESPONDENT, v. OLD CEDAR DEVELOPMENT CORP., ET AL.…

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

Date published: Mar 5, 2001

Citations

281 A.D.2d 397 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)
721 N.Y.S.2d 277

Citing Cases

Tovia Capital, LLC v. Katebi

However, as neither the order appealed from nor the prior order clearly addressed defendant's claim of an…

Pacheco v. City of New York

The Supreme Court held the appellant's motion for summary judgment in abeyance, thus leaving the motion…