Plaintiffs' notice of voluntary discontinuance was untimely under CPLR 3217 (a), and was apparently served to avoid an adverse decision on the pending motion to dismiss the complaint with prejudice (see McMahan v McMahan,
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Let's get started
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
ROSENFELD v. RENIKA PTY. LTD.
5225, 600061/10.
84 A.D.3d 703 (2011)
923 N.Y.S.2d 328
STEVEN ROSENFELD et al., Respondents, v. RENIKA PTY. LTD. et al., Appellants.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department.https://leagle.com/images/logo.png
Decided May 31, 2011.
Decided May 31, 2011.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department.
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.