From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Belle v. Chromalloy American Corporation

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Mar 18, 1976
51 A.D.2d 933 (N.Y. App. Div. 1976)

Opinion

March 18, 1976


Order entered in the Supreme Court, New York County, on July 30, 1975, unanimously affirmed, with $40 costs and disbursements to respondents. As conceded by appellant in his brief, Special Term had the statutory authorization and discretion to hold the motion in abeyance pending a reference to a Special Referee to whom the court referred certain questions, including whether one of the defendants was served in this defamation action. Appellant takes the position that considering all the information available to the court in the motion papers, the reference was an abuse of discretion. We do not agree. The facts are sharply controverted. The reference should be of valuable aid to the court to properly decide the matter.

Concur — Markewich, J.P., Murphy, Lupiano, Capozzoli and Nunez, JJ.


Summaries of

Belle v. Chromalloy American Corporation

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Mar 18, 1976
51 A.D.2d 933 (N.Y. App. Div. 1976)
Case details for

Belle v. Chromalloy American Corporation

Case Details

Full title:EARL BELLE, Appellant, v. CHROMALLOY AMERICAN CORPORATION et al.…

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

Date published: Mar 18, 1976

Citations

51 A.D.2d 933 (N.Y. App. Div. 1976)

Citing Cases

Rosen v. Rosen

Consent by the parties is required only where the reference is one to "hear and determine," not "hear and…

Martin-Trigona v. Waaler Evans

This was not a proper exercise of discretion, since there is no "exceptional condition" (CPLR 4212) or…