From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Gatz v. Foster

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 5, 1990
159 A.D.2d 482 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)

Opinion

March 5, 1990

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Jones, J.).


Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

We find that the Supreme Court properly denied the defendant's motion to dismiss the complaint, without prejudice to renew, since we are unable to conclusively determine, on the basis of the present record, whether the defendant was a party to the underlying contract or whether he may be held legally responsible for the damages resulting from the breach of that contract.

The judgment in favor of the plaintiffs in a prior lawsuit involving the subject contract does not preclude the prosecution of the instant action since the defendant was not a party to that lawsuit nor was that judgment satisfied (see, CPLR 3002 [a]). Mangano, J.P., Kunzeman, Eiber and Harwood, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Gatz v. Foster

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 5, 1990
159 A.D.2d 482 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)
Case details for

Gatz v. Foster

Case Details

Full title:WALTER GATZ et al., Respondents, v. ARTHUR P. FOSTER, Appellant

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

Date published: Mar 5, 1990

Citations

159 A.D.2d 482 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)

Citing Cases

Spainerman Gallery v. Merritt

Further, a plaintiff may obtain judgments against multiple parties until the judgments are satisfied and…

Spainerman Gallery v. Merritt

Further, a plaintiff may obtain judgments against multiple parties until the judgments are satisfied and…