While MVAIC's second motion challenging the motion court's claimed oversight of MVAIC's opposition to plaintiff's motion for leave to sue MVAIC was properly deemed by the motion court as one to reargue MVAIC's first motion challenging the claimed oversight, the motion court erred in concluding that the second motion was untimely. When MVAIC made the second motion, the order rendered on its first motion had not yet been served with notice of entry. Therefore, the time to appeal...
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.