From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Spremo v. Babchik

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 12, 1995
216 A.D.2d 382 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)

Opinion

June 12, 1995

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


Ordered that the judgment is modified, on the law, by (1) deleting from the first decretal paragraph the phrase beginning with the words, "and all matters involving the law firm of Bergadano, Zichello Babchik" and ending with the phrase "be and the same hereby", and substituting therefor the word "is", and (2) adding to the second decretal paragraph after the words, "Civil Court of the City of New York", the words, "without prior approval of the Administrative Judge of the court in which he seeks to institute a further action or proceeding"; as so modified, the judgment is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The Supreme Court's injunctive relief was improper only insofar as it did not permit the plaintiff to institute an action or proceeding as a pro se litigant with prior judicial approval (see, e.g., Sassower v. Signorelli, 99 A.D.2d 358; Matter of Winters v. Gould, 143 Misc.2d 44).

We further find that the court improperly dismissed actions which were not before it (see generally, 1 Carmody-Wait 2d, NY Prac § 3.33, at 499).

With respect to the other issues raised by the plaintiff, we affirm the judgment, as modified, for reasons stated by Justice Lonschein at the Supreme Court, Queens County, in his decision and order dated September 30, 1992. Bracken, J.P., Rosenblatt, Ritter and Goldstein, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Spremo v. Babchik

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 12, 1995
216 A.D.2d 382 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
Case details for

Spremo v. Babchik

Case Details

Full title:ALFRED SPREMO, JR., Appellant, v. FRED BABCHIK et al., Respondents

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

Date published: Jun 12, 1995

Citations

216 A.D.2d 382 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
628 N.Y.S.2d 167

Citing Cases

U.S. Bank v. Gilchrist

However, as argued by the plaintiff, the doctrine of res judicata is not applicable here. Res judicata…

Spano v. Riley

Supreme Court properly granted the motions of defendants to dismiss the complaint pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a)…