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.
Peter Davey, Plaintiff–Appellant, v. Goodrich & Bendish, et al., Defendants–Respondents.
Peter F. Davey, appellant pro se.
John A. Raimondo, P.C., Elmsford (John A. Raimondo of counsel), for Goodrich & Bendish and Bruce Bendish, respondents.
Kelly & Knaplund, White Plains (Mary F. Kelly of counsel), for Kelly & Knaplund and Mary F. Kelly, respondents.
_
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Debra A. James, J.), entered April 4, 2013, which granted defendants' motion to dismiss the complaint on the ground that plaintiff failed to comply with two standing orders of Supreme Court, New York County, requiring him to obtain judicial permission prior to commencing any litigation relating to matters herein, and on the ground of res judicata, and scheduled a hearing to determine why plaintiff should not be held in civil and/or criminal contempt for violating said standing orders, and the amount of costs, attorneys' fees, and sanctions to be assessed against plaintiff, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
The instant action was properly dismissed based on plaintiff's admitted violation of the two prior court orders requiring him to obtain judicial permission before commencing any litigation relating to his divorce action (see Davey v. Kelly, 57 AD3d 230, 230 [1st Dept 2008]; see also Matter of Davey, 111 AD3d 207, 213 [1st Dept 2013] ). Given his numerous unsuccessful attempts to relitigate the matters raised in this action, the doctrines of res judicata and collateral estoppel also bar plaintiff's claims (see Matter of Hunter, 4 NY3d 260, 269 [2005]; Kaufman v. Eli Lilly & Co., 65 N.Y.2d 449, 455 [1985] ).
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER
OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.
_
CLERK
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: 1289 8
Decided: June 26, 2014
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First 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)