From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Rotunno v. Rotunno

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 3, 1993
193 A.D.2d 592 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)

Opinion

May 3, 1993

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Cohalan, J.).


Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.

The wife contends that it was improper for the Supreme Court to grant the husband's motion for summary judgment, since issue had not been joined pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a). We disagree. CPLR 3211 (c) permits a motion pursuant to CPLR 3211 to be treated as one for summary judgment where adequate notice has been given to the parties. In this case, the defendant moved to dismiss under CPLR 3211, and the plaintiff cross-moved for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. Therefore, the defendant cannot claim that she lacked adequate notice that the issue of summary judgment was before the court. We further note that the papers clearly supported granting summary judgment to the plaintiff.

The other claims raised by the defendant are either dehors the record or without merit. Mangano, P.J., Sullivan, O'Brien and Pizzuto, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Rotunno v. Rotunno

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 3, 1993
193 A.D.2d 592 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)
Case details for

Rotunno v. Rotunno

Case Details

Full title:ROBERT R. ROTUNNO, Respondent, v. PATRICIA ROTUNNO, Appellant

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

Date published: May 3, 1993

Citations

193 A.D.2d 592 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)
598 N.Y.S.2d 957

Citing Cases

TST/Impreso, Inc. v. Cosmos Forms, Ltd.

moved for summary judgment in its favor. Accordingly, the appellant cannot claim that she lacked adequate…

Pinnacle Realty of N.Y., LLC v. 255 Butler LLC

Plaintiff's Summary Judgment Cross MotionCPLR 3212(a) prohibits seeking summary judgment before joinder of…