From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Martin v. Waldbaum's Supermarket

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 29, 1991
172 A.D.2d 804 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)

Opinion

April 29, 1991

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Queens County (Leviss, J.).


Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

A motion to remove an action from the Civil Court to the Supreme Court pursuant to CPLR 325 (b) must be accompanied by a request for leave to amend the ad damnum clause of the complaint pursuant to CPLR 3025 (b) (McLaughlin, Practice Commentaries, McKinney's Cons Laws of NY, Book 7B, CPLR 325:2, at 564). Here, the amount stated in the ad damnum clause was within the jurisdictional limits of the Civil Court, and no request for leave to amend the ad damnum clause was made. In the absence of an application to increase the ad damnum clause, the Supreme Court's denial of removal was proper (see, Francilion v Epstein, 144 A.D.2d 633, 633-634; Huston v. Rao, 74 A.D.2d 127, 130, 131; 1 Weinstein-Korn-Miller, N Y Civ Prac ¶ 325.11; Siegel, N.Y. Prac § 25). Thompson, J.P., Kunzeman, Eiber, Rosenblatt and Ritter, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Martin v. Waldbaum's Supermarket

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 29, 1991
172 A.D.2d 804 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)
Case details for

Martin v. Waldbaum's Supermarket

Case Details

Full title:IRIS MARTIN, Appellant, v. WALDBAUM'S SUPERMARKET, Respondent

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

Date published: Apr 29, 1991

Citations

172 A.D.2d 804 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)

Citing Cases

Mears v. Chrysler Financial Corp.

By notice of appeal dated October 28, 1994, defendants appealed to the Appellate Term which, in the order…