From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Stone Column Trading House Ltd. v. Beogradska Banka A.D. in Bankruptcy

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
May 24, 2016
139 A.D.3d 577 (N.Y. App. Div. 2016)

Opinion

650228/13, 1232, 1231.

05-24-2016

STONE COLUMN TRADING HOUSE LIMITED, Claimant–Appellant, v. BEOGRADSKA BANKA A.D. in Bankruptcy, Claimant–Respondent.

Medenica Law PLLC, New York (Olivera Medenica of counsel) and Law Offices of Martin Novar, New York (Martin Novar of counsel), for appellant. Marion & Allen, P.C., New York (Roger K. Marion of counsel), for respondent.


Medenica Law PLLC, New York (Olivera Medenica of counsel) and Law Offices of Martin Novar, New York (Martin Novar of counsel), for appellant.

Marion & Allen, P.C., New York (Roger K. Marion of counsel), for respondent.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Charles E. Ramos, J.), entered November 10, 2015, which, upon reargument of claimant Stone Column Trading House Limited's motion for summary judgment, adhered to the original order, entered December 22, 2014, denying the motion, unanimously affirmed, with costs. Appeal from order entered December 22, 2014, unanimously dismissed, without costs, as academic.

The motion court correctly determined that Stone Column's motion for summary judgment was premature because it served the motion prior to joinder of issue (CPLR 3212[a] ; City of Rochester v. Chiarella, 65 N.Y.2d 92, 101, 490 N.Y.S.2d 174, 479 N.E.2d 810 [1985] ). Pursuant to a stipulation, the parties agreed to proceed against each other in a consolidated interpleader action involving the parties' competing claims to an amount on deposit at a bank in liquidation proceedings (see CPLR 1006 ). The stipulation shows that the parties contemplated answering interrogatories in lieu of filing answers to each other's complaints. As interrogatories have yet to be completely answered, and objections thereto resolved, issue has not been joined. Moreover, the motion court correctly noted that discovery is still outstanding on numerous material issues of fact (CPLR 3212[f] ; First Bank of Ams. v. Motor Car Funding, 257 A.D.2d 287, 293–294, 690 N.Y.S.2d 17 [1st Dept.1999] ).

We have considered Stone Column's remaining arguments and find them unavailing.

SWEENY, J.P., RENWICK, MOSKOWITZ, KAPNICK, GESMER, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Stone Column Trading House Ltd. v. Beogradska Banka A.D. in Bankruptcy

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
May 24, 2016
139 A.D.3d 577 (N.Y. App. Div. 2016)
Case details for

Stone Column Trading House Ltd. v. Beogradska Banka A.D. in Bankruptcy

Case Details

Full title:STONE COLUMN TRADING HOUSE LIMITED, Claimant–Appellant, v. BEOGRADSKA…

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.

Date published: May 24, 2016

Citations

139 A.D.3d 577 (N.Y. App. Div. 2016)
2016 N.Y. Slip Op. 3996
30 N.Y.S.3d 817

Citing Cases

Hous. Rights Initiative, Inc. v. Elliman

Further, Plaintiff has submitted the affidavit of deputy director of HRI, Joshua Murillo, in opposition to…

First Mercury Ins. Co. v. D'Amato & Lynch, LLP

Simonds v.Simonds, 45 N.Y.2d 233, 242-43 (1978); AQ Asset Mgt. LLC v. Levine, 154 A.D.3d 430, 431 (1st Dep't…