From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Downtown Art Co. v. Zimmerman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Oct 22, 1996
232 A.D.2d 270 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)

Opinion

October 22, 1996.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Herman Cahn, J.), entered March 7, 1996, which, insofar as appealed from, denied plaintiff's motion for an order precluding defendant from offering any evidence at trial to show that defendant owns or owned the assets of Soho Booking, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Before: Murphy, P.J., Sullivan, Rubin, Ross and "Williams, JJ.


Plaintiff's motion in limine was an inappropriate device to obtain relief in the nature of partial summary judgment. In any event, the documents submitted by plaintiff in support of the motion raise material issues of fact, such that resolution of the question on this appeal would be inappropriate.


Summaries of

Downtown Art Co. v. Zimmerman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Oct 22, 1996
232 A.D.2d 270 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
Case details for

Downtown Art Co. v. Zimmerman

Case Details

Full title:DOWNTOWN ART CO., Appellant, v. CATHERINE ZIMMERMAN, Respondent

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

Date published: Oct 22, 1996

Citations

232 A.D.2d 270 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
648 N.Y.S.2d 101

Citing Cases

Rondout Electric, Inc. v. Dover Union Free School District

Contrary to the dissent's unsupported assertion, Dover's motion was the functional equivalent of a motion…

West Broadway v. Friedman

Ordered that the amended judgment is reversed, on the law, with costs, the motion of the plaintiff Harrison…