From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Flomenhaft v. Fine Arts Museum of Long Island

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 2, 1998
255 A.D.2d 290 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)

Opinion

November 2, 1998

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Murphy, J.).


Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

There is nothing in the instant motion that could not have been raised in the plaintiff's previous motion for summary judgment. It is well established that "`[m]ultiple summary judgment motions in the same action should be discouraged in the absence of a showing of newly discovered evidence or other sufficient cause'" (Giganti v. Town of Hempstead, 186 A.D.2d 627, 628; La Freniere v. Capital Dist. Transp. Auth., 105 A.D.2d 517, 518; see also, Dillon v. Dean, 170 A.D.2d 574). Thus, the plaintiff's latest motion for summary judgment was properly denied.

Mangano, P. J., Joy, Friedmann and Goldstein, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Flomenhaft v. Fine Arts Museum of Long Island

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 2, 1998
255 A.D.2d 290 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
Case details for

Flomenhaft v. Fine Arts Museum of Long Island

Case Details

Full title:ELEANOR FLOMENHAFT, Appellant, v. FINE ARTS MUSEUM OF LONG ISLAND…

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

Date published: Nov 2, 1998

Citations

255 A.D.2d 290 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
679 N.Y.S.2d 322

Citing Cases

Scrubb v. Gould

(2)Courts often reiterate that making multiple summary judgment motions in the same action is improper unless…

Rose v. Horton Medical Center

Contrary to the plaintiff's contention, the Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in…