From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

RYAN v. LA ROSA

Supreme Court, Special Term, Nassau County
Apr 6, 1960
22 Misc. 2d 125 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1960)

Opinion

April 6, 1960

William J. Ryan, plaintiff in person.

Albert M. Goldberg for defendants.


Motion to cancel a notice of pendency of action granted.

The plaintiff is an attorney who has allegedly represented the defendants in certain real estate negotiations. In a complaint containing seven causes of action he sues for the reasonable value of his services. None of the actions are brought to "recover a judgment affecting the title to, or the possession, use, or enjoyment of real property" (Civ. Prac. Act, § 120). Therefore, the plaintiff was not entitled to file a notice of pendency of action ( Kauffman v. Simis, 156 App. Div. 208). However, as the motion is for relief under section 120, and not under section 123 of the Civil Practice Act, no allowance is made for the costs and expenses to which reference is made in section 123.

Submit order.


Summaries of

RYAN v. LA ROSA

Supreme Court, Special Term, Nassau County
Apr 6, 1960
22 Misc. 2d 125 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1960)
Case details for

RYAN v. LA ROSA

Case Details

Full title:WILLIAM J. RYAN, Plaintiff, v. FRANK LA ROSA, Individually and Doing…

Court:Supreme Court, Special Term, Nassau County

Date published: Apr 6, 1960

Citations

22 Misc. 2d 125 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1960)
202 N.Y.S.2d 802

Citing Cases

Tropeano v. Laurie

The appellant attorney, Kimberly B. Fischer, filed a notice of pendency against the marital residence of…

Snitow v. State of New York

Claimants were not entitled to file a lispendens. ( Kaufman v. Simis, 156 App. Div. 208; Ryan v. La Rosa, 22…