From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Tiffany Prop. v. Maron

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 14, 2006
34 A.D.3d 548 (N.Y. App. Div. 2006)

Opinion

2006-03551.

November 14, 2006.

In an action to recover damages for malicious prosecution and abuse of process, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Jamieson, J.), entered February 16, 2006, which denied its motion pursuant to CPLR 8404 for judicial review of taxation of costs and disbursements in the principal sum of $965.62, which were awarded to the defendants in a clerk's judgment of the same court dated June 1, 2005.

Vivian L. Hausch, White Plains, N.Y., for appellant.

Miranda Sokoloff Sambursky Slone Verveniotis LLP, Mineola, N.Y. (Michael A. Miranda, Adam I. Kleinberg, and Charles A. Martin of counsel), for respondents.

Before: Adams, J.P., Ritter, Mastro and Lifson, JJ., concur.


Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The plaintiff's contentions that the costs and disbursements awarded to the defendants were improperly taxed and that the Supreme Court failed to perform a judicial review of such taxation are without merit ( see CPLR 8101, 8201, 8301 [a] [12]; 8404; Shapiro v Aetna Cas. Sur. Co., 73 AD2d 616; East Thirteenth St. Community Assn. v New York State Urban Dev. Corp., 164 Misc 2d 589).

Under the facts of this case, we decline to impose a sanction against the plaintiff ( see 22 NYCRR 130-1.1 [a]).


Summaries of

Tiffany Prop. v. Maron

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 14, 2006
34 A.D.3d 548 (N.Y. App. Div. 2006)
Case details for

Tiffany Prop. v. Maron

Case Details

Full title:P N TIFFANY PROPERTIES, INC., Appellant, v. LESLIE B. MARON et al.…

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

Date published: Nov 14, 2006

Citations

34 A.D.3d 548 (N.Y. App. Div. 2006)
2006 N.Y. Slip Op. 8227
823 N.Y.S.2d 676

Citing Cases

Hulse v. Simoes

However, as the plaintiff, proponent of the counter-judgment, has presented her arguments here, and no…