1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. A.D.3d
  4. 3 A.D.3d
  5. 3 A.D.3d 394 (2004)
 

SOMOZA v. PECHNIK

3 A.D.3d 394 (2004)

772 N.Y.S.2d 2

STEPHEN SOMOZA, Appellant, v. SAMUEL J. PECHNIK et al., Respondents. (Action No. 1.) SAMUEL J. PECHNIK et al., Appellants, v. MAXLOGER CORP. et al., Respondents. (Action No. 2.) (And Another Action.)

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, First Department.

January 15, 2004.

There are several issues of fact in Action No. 1 regarding the stock purchase agreement, the consulting agreement and the promissory notes signed by Somoza, justifying denial of that plaintiff's motion for summary judgment. However, the pendency of that action did not warrant a stay of the execution of judgment in Action No. 2, since Somoza's claims for a setoff are not inextricably intertwined with or inseparable from the issues involved in Action No. 1 (Banco do Estado...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

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.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases