From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Chang v. Liu

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Nov 13, 2003
1 A.D.3d 156 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)

Opinion

2180N

November 13, 2003.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Joan Lobis, J.), entered December 2, 2002, which denied appellant's motion to intervene, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Leon K. Luk, for plaintiff-respondent.

David C. Yolleck, for defendant-respondent.

Bruce Feffer, for proposed intervenor-appellant.

Before: Buckley, P.J., Mazzarelli, Andrias, Sullivan, Marlow, JJ.


Proposed intervenor, a prospective purchaser of real property that had been affected by a matrimonial action, waited nearly four years after being served with a copy of an injunction against the sale before attempting to challenge the injunction by intervening in the matrimonial action. Moreover, by the time the motion to intervene was made, a total of eight years had elapsed from the conclusion of the matrimonial case. Since the proposed intervenor offered no adequate explanation for the delay, the court properly exercised its discretion in denying intervention on the ground of untimeliness (see Vacco v. Herrera, 247 A.D.2d 608), notwithstanding that intervention was sought as of right (see CPLR 1012[a][3]; Berry v. St. Peter's Hosp. of City of Albany, 250 A.D.2d 63, 69, lv dismissed 92 N.Y.2d 1045). We have considered and rejected the proposed intervenor's remaining arguments.

Motion seeking leave to strike brief denied.

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.


Summaries of

Chang v. Liu

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Nov 13, 2003
1 A.D.3d 156 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
Case details for

Chang v. Liu

Case Details

Full title:TZO KAO CHANG, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. WEI QING LIU…

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

Date published: Nov 13, 2003

Citations

1 A.D.3d 156 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
766 N.Y.S.2d 841

Citing Cases

Thomas v. Lynch

Proposed Intervenor obviously knew of this action's existence since it was commenced in September 2016.…

In Matter of Ralston v. Lepow

The court should also consider whether the intervention will unduly delay the determination of the action or…