1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. A.D.3d
  4. 68 A.D.3d
  5. 68 A.D.3d 569 (2009)
 

CUOMO v. UPPAL

1829, 400071/08

68 A.D.3d 569 (2009)

2009 NY Slip Op 9386

892 N.Y.S.2d 49

ANDREW M. CUOMO, as Attorney General of the State of New York, et al., Respondents, v. DARSHAN UPPAL, Also Known as LAL, et al., Defendants. CAPITAL BUSINESS CREDIT LLC, Nonparty Appellant.

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

Decided December 17, 2009.

Contrary to plaintiffs' claim, Capital does not have to await the conclusion of this forfeiture action to request the release of funds; paragraph 7 of the parties' stipulation reserved Capital's right to make motions.

Also contrary to plaintiffs' contention, Capital is not limited to the remedy of receiving proceeds from a forfeiture sale; unlike the situation in Property Clerk of N.Y. City Police Dept. v Molomo (81 N.Y.2d 936

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