From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Roebuck v. Roebuck

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Oct 27, 1970
35 A.D.2d 714 (N.Y. App. Div. 1970)

Opinion

October 27, 1970


Appeal by defendant from an order entered in Supreme Court, New York County on March 11, 1970, which granted defendant's motion to dismiss the complaint with leave to plaintiff to serve an amended complaint, unanimously dismissed, without costs and without disbursements, without prejudice to any timely corrective application addressed to the amended complaint. The order appealed from granted the defendant's motion to dismiss the complaint for insufficiency of allegations and did not concern itself with the alternative relief sought by defendant pursuant to CPLR 3024 (subd. [b]). Having determined that the complaint was fatally defective for insufficiency, it was unnecessary for Special Term to pass on the request for alternative relief. Since the complaint was dismissed, appellant is not an aggrieved party by virtue of failure to grant the alternative relief sought by defendant, and the appeal must therefore be dismissed. Any corrective motion defendant is advised to make, must timely be addressed to the amended complaint.

Concur — Eager, J.P., Capozzoli, McGivern, Markewich and McNally, JJ.


Summaries of

Roebuck v. Roebuck

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Oct 27, 1970
35 A.D.2d 714 (N.Y. App. Div. 1970)
Case details for

Roebuck v. Roebuck

Case Details

Full title:MELVIN ROEBUCK, Respondent, v. EDYTH ROEBUCK, Appellant

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

Date published: Oct 27, 1970

Citations

35 A.D.2d 714 (N.Y. App. Div. 1970)

Citing Cases

McCarthy v. 390 Tower Assoc

In light of the fact that Tower Associates and Structure Tone specifically raised the issue of common-law…

Broadway Equities v. Metropolitan Electric

Silvestre lacks standing to seek the disqualification of the Mintz Firm, and therefore that branch of his…