From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Pappas v. Pilevsky

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Mar 19, 1996
225 A.D.2d 394 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)

Opinion

March 19, 1996

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Carol Huff, J.).


In this action for an accounting, defendants moved to dismiss just prior to commencement of the disclosure that was intended to clarify the nature of the defendant business entities, and the interaction and relationship among those entities and the individual parties. As it appeared that facts essential to justify opposition to defendants' motion may exist but could not then be stated, the IAS Court properly denied the motion with leave to renew after completion of appropriate disclosure (CPLR 3211 [d]; 3212 [f]; Terranova v Emil, 20 N.Y.2d 493, 497; Simpson v Term Indus., 126 A.D.2d 484, 486).

Concur — Murphy, P.J., Milonas, Rosenberger, Ross and Mazzarelli, JJ.


Summaries of

Pappas v. Pilevsky

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Mar 19, 1996
225 A.D.2d 394 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
Case details for

Pappas v. Pilevsky

Case Details

Full title:LOUIS PAPPAS, Respondent, v. PHILIP PILEVSKY, Individually and Doing…

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

Date published: Mar 19, 1996

Citations

225 A.D.2d 394 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
640 N.Y.S.2d 747

Citing Cases

Lemle v. Lemle

The accountant points to numerous other discrepancies in the loan accounts and other corporate records. In…

JD2 Realty Mgt. v. Evojets LLC

The affidavit from an employee at defendant My Jet Saver and Evojets' counsel's affirmation averring that the…