In its motion papers for reargument of the order denying its motion to dismiss, the City included a copy of the order appealed from, stamped with the date of its entry, and an affirmation by an attorney in support of the motion which referred to the enclosed order. This was sufficient to trigger the 30-day period to take an appeal for both parties (CPLR 5513 [a]; see Norstar Bank of Upstate NY v Office Control Sys.,
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.
PERALTA v. CITY OF NEW YORK
6854, 310518/08, 6855.
92 A.D.3d 554 (2012)
938 N.Y.S.2d 438
2012 NY Slip Op 1336
DANIEL PERALTA et al., Respondents, v. CITY OF NEW YORK, Appellant, et al., Defendants.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department.https://leagle.com/images/logo.png
Decided February 21, 2012.
Decided February 21, 2012.
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.
