Order affirmed, with costs.
This court has previously determined that the allegedly new material facts submitted in support of the defendants' cross motion could not properly be considered by Special Term because the "new" material could have been submitted with the defendants' original cross motion for summary judgment (see, Curry v Nocket,
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
- Updated daily.
- Uncompromising quality.
- Complete, Accurate, Current.