From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

McCann v. Locks

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 2, 1990
160 A.D.2d 688 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)

Summary

finding that while the defendants' "letter" to the plaintiff's attorney "did not constitute an answer, it was, nevertheless, an appearance and the defendant Kief's pro se attempt to participate in the action"

Summary of this case from Kelsey v. Forster & Garbus, LLP

Opinion

April 2, 1990

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Burstein, J.).


Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

We agree with the Supreme Court that there are material issues of fact necessitating a trial for their resolution. Therefore, the Supreme Court properly denied the motion for summary judgment. Bracken, J.P., Lawrence, Kunzeman and Kooper, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

McCann v. Locks

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 2, 1990
160 A.D.2d 688 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)

finding that while the defendants' "letter" to the plaintiff's attorney "did not constitute an answer, it was, nevertheless, an appearance and the defendant Kief's pro se attempt to participate in the action"

Summary of this case from Kelsey v. Forster & Garbus, LLP
Case details for

McCann v. Locks

Case Details

Full title:TERRENCE McCANN et al., Respondents, v. CHARLES LOCKS, Defendant, and…

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

Date published: Apr 2, 1990

Citations

160 A.D.2d 688 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)
553 N.Y.S.2d 462

Citing Cases

Travelon, Inc. v. Maekitan

"The occasion for [an informal] appearance [is] an infrequent thing" ( Siegel & Connors, New York Practice §…

Wells Fargo Bank v. Butler

For the most part, caselaw is clear that, where a defendant makes an “informal appearance” within the time…