Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
CRANE-HOGAN STRUCTURAL SYSTEMS, INC., PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, v. ESLS DEVELOPMENT, LLC, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
ESLS DEVELOPMENT, LLC, THIRD-PARTY PLAINTIFF, v. PIERCE ENGINEERING, P.C., THIRD-PARTY DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.
Memorandum: Plaintiff commenced this breach of contract action seeking, inter alia, payment for work that it performed on a parking garage owned by defendant-third-party plaintiff (defendant). Supreme Court, inter alia, granted plaintiff's motion for summary judgment on the breach of contract cause of action and denied defendant's cross motion to compel plaintiff to comply with discovery demands and for summary judgment dismissing the complaint to the extent that it sought payment “in excess of the contract sum.” The court subsequently granted defendant's motion for leave to reargue its opposition to plaintiff's motion and adhered to its prior determination, but it appears that no order was ever entered on that motion. However, a final monetary judgment was entered thereafter. Although defendant appeals from the court's initial order and judgment, we exercise our discretion to treat the notice of appeal as valid and deem the appeal as taken from the final judgment (see CPLR 5520 [c]; McLaughlin v. Midrox Ins. Co. [appeal No. 2], 70 AD3d 1463, 1464-1465; Tambe Elec., Inc. v. Home Depot U.S.A., Inc., 49 AD3d 1161). We affirm for reasons stated in the decision at Supreme Court underlying the initial order and judgment and for reasons stated in the decision at Supreme Court granting defendant's motion for leave to reargue.
Patricia L. Morgan
Clerk of the Court
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: CA 10-00527
Decided: October 01, 2010
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)