From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Dale Mortgage Bankers Corp. v. Allington

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Mar 20, 1997
237 A.D.2d 832 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)

Opinion

March 20, 1997.

Crew III, J. Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court (Relihan, Jr., J.), entered March 19, 1996 in Tompkins County, which, inter alia, denied plaintiffs motion to declare certain moneys surplus funds.

Before: Cardona, P.J., Mikoll, Yesawich Jr. and Spain, JJ.


On this appeal, plaintiff attempts to argue the very issue previously addressed and decided by this Court on plaintiffs prior appeal in this matter ( 217 AD2d 739, lv denied 87 NY2d 804) — namely, the nature of certain insurance proceeds and the party to whom said proceeds should be distributed. That issue having been conclusively resolved, plaintiff is barred from relitigating that issue under the doctrine of res judicata ( see, O'Brien v City of Syracuse, 54 NY2d 353, 357). To the extent that plaintiff seeks to avail itself of this Court's subsequent decision in Melino v National Grange Mut. Ins. Co. ( 213 AD2d 86, appeal dismissed 87 NY2d 897), we need note only that "`[t]he conclusive effect of a final disposition is not to be disturbed by a subsequent change in decisional law'" ( Matter of Gowan v Tully, 45 NY2d 32, 36, quoting Slater v American Min. Spirits Co., 33 NY2d 443, 447).

Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs.


Summaries of

Dale Mortgage Bankers Corp. v. Allington

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Mar 20, 1997
237 A.D.2d 832 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)
Case details for

Dale Mortgage Bankers Corp. v. Allington

Case Details

Full title:DALE MORTGAGE BANKERS CORPORATION, Appellant, v. JOSEPH E. ALLINGTON et…

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

Date published: Mar 20, 1997

Citations

237 A.D.2d 832 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)
656 N.Y.S.2d 950

Citing Cases

Matter of Torres v. Fischer

To the extent that Guido is applicable here, the Court must also observe that, as noted, in this instance the…

Greece Town Mall, L.P. v. State

As remittal to the Board is not required, we grant respondents' request to address the merits of petitioner's…