From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

McDutchess Builders, Inc. v. Dutchess Knolls

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 24, 1997
244 A.D.2d 534 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)

Opinion

November 24, 1997

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Dutchess County (Hillery, J.).


Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

A motion to consolidate actions pursuant to CPLR 602 (a) rests in the sound discretion of the trial court. Absent a showing of prejudice to a substantial right by a party opposing the motion, consolidation should be granted where common questions of law or fact exist ( see, Rodgers v. Worrell, 214 A.D.2d 553). In this case, we find no basis to disturb the Supreme Court's decision to consolidate the actions.

Mangano, P. J., Copertino, Joy, Florio and Luciano, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

McDutchess Builders, Inc. v. Dutchess Knolls

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 24, 1997
244 A.D.2d 534 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)
Case details for

McDutchess Builders, Inc. v. Dutchess Knolls

Case Details

Full title:McDUTCHESS BUILDERS, INC., Respondent, v. DUTCHESS KNOLLS, INC., et al.…

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

Date published: Nov 24, 1997

Citations

244 A.D.2d 534 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)
665 N.Y.S.2d 579

Citing Cases

Stracham v. Bresnick

See Palmiero v. North Shore University Hosp., 194 AD2d 596 (2nd Dept 1993); Rodgers v. Worrell, 214 AD2d 553…

Romano v. T.N. Ward Co.

Here, consolidation is appropriate, as the above-entitled actions involve common questions of fact and law,…