From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Zambrano v. Makita Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 16, 1998
256 A.D.2d 461 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)

Opinion

December 16, 1998

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


Ordered that the appeal from the decision is dismissed, as no appeal lies from a decision ( see, Schicchi v. Green Constr. Corp., 100 A.D.2d 509); and it is further,

Ordered that the appeal from the order is dismissed; and it is further,

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed; and it is further,

Ordered that one bill of costs is awarded to the respondents appearing separately and filing separate briefs.

The appeal from the intermediate order must be dismissed because the right of direct appeal therefrom terminated with the entry of the judgment in the action ( see, Matter of Aho, 39 N.Y.2d 241, 248). The issues raised on appeal from the decision and the order are brought up for review and have been considered on the appeal from the judgment (CPLR 5501 [a] [1]).

Contrary to the plaintiff's contention, the Supreme Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in denying the plaintiff's attempt to assert a new theory of liability in opposition to the motion for summary judgment ( see, Lewis v. New York City Hous. Auth., 237 A.D.2d 414; see also, Barraza v. Sambade, 212 A.D.2d 655; Girardin v. Town of Hempstead, 209 A.D.2d 668).

The plaintiff's remaining contention is without merit.

Rosenblatt, J. P., Santucci, Friedmann and McGinity, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Zambrano v. Makita Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 16, 1998
256 A.D.2d 461 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
Case details for

Zambrano v. Makita Corp.

Case Details

Full title:RAFAEL ZAMBRANO, Appellant, v. MAKITA CORP., Also Known as MAKITA…

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

Date published: Dec 16, 1998

Citations

256 A.D.2d 461 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
683 N.Y.S.2d 437