The motion court properly dismissed plaintiff's first, third, fourth and fifth causes of action and class allegations since they were premised upon plaintiff's incorrect assertion that leased automobiles may not be levied upon by seizure pursuant to CPLR 5232 (b). Inasmuch as the interest of an automobile lessee, such as plaintiff, is present and possessory, it is a tangible interest in personal property "capable of delivery by taking the property into custody" and thus is...
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.