From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Johnson v. Fuller

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jan 28, 1997
235 A.D.2d 348 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)

Opinion

January 28, 1997.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Louis York, J.), entered on or about October 18, 1995, which, insofar as appealed from, deemed defendant-appellant's cross motion for leave to file a summary judgment motion to be a motion for summary judgment, and denied the motion, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Before: Nardelli, J. P., Rubin, Tom and Andrias, JJ.


To the extent that appellant's cross motion, denominated one for leave to file a summary judgment motion, is not deemed one for summary judgment, it is merely a motion to reargue a prior order of another Justice, the denial of which is not appealable ( Kean v Phelps, 186 AD2d 368). That prior order, which, upon granting plaintiff leave to amend his complaint, prohibited the parties from making a summary judgment motion until completion of all discovery, was adhered to by orders of two other Justices, never appealed by appellant and constituted the law of the case ( see, Martin v City of Cohoes, 37 NY2d 162, 165). Searching the record on appeal, as appellant asks us to do, we find that, at the time appellant made the instant motion, there was discovery outstanding. We note that defendant can still move for summary judgment after all discovery has taken place.


Summaries of

Johnson v. Fuller

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jan 28, 1997
235 A.D.2d 348 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)
Case details for

Johnson v. Fuller

Case Details

Full title:CHRISTOPHER JOHNSON, Respondent, v. GEORGE A. FULLER COMPANY, Respondent…

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

Date published: Jan 28, 1997

Citations

235 A.D.2d 348 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)
653 N.Y.S.2d 10

Citing Cases

Lekutanovic v. City of New York

Those records might or might not reveal a hazard at the location of the accident, which could raise a…

Dipasquale v. Ronald

Although plaintiff captioned his motion as one for partial summary judgment, the IAS court correctly held it…