From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Marsh

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Sep 29, 1994
207 A.D.2d 749 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)

Opinion

September 29, 1994

Appeal from the Surrogate's Court, New York County (Eve Preminger, S.).


The Surrogate correctly found that petitioner's motion to disqualify opposing counsel was frivolous, since the motion added nothing in either fact or theory to petitioner's prior unsuccessful motions for the same relief on identical grounds (see, 179 A.D.2d 578; 179 A.D.2d 581). Having been apprised by the court of her intention to consider the issues of costs and sanctions, and then availing herself of the opportunity to submit an affidavit in opposition, petitioner was provided adequate notice and opportunity to be heard, despite the absence of a formal evidentiary hearing (Dubai Bank v. Ayyub, 187 A.D.2d 373; 22 NYCRR 130-1.1 [d]). The written order of the Surrogate sufficiently complied with the requirements of the Rules of the Chief Administrator (Lynn v. Barnes Noble, 189 A.D.2d 560) in explaining the relatively modest sanction imposed under the circumstances of this case.

Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Carro, Kupferman, Nardelli and Tom, JJ.


Summaries of

Matter of Marsh

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Sep 29, 1994
207 A.D.2d 749 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
Case details for

Matter of Marsh

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of the Estate of NICHOLAS MARSH, Also Known as NICHOLAS V…

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

Date published: Sep 29, 1994

Citations

207 A.D.2d 749 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
616 N.Y.S.2d 962

Citing Cases

Santaliz v. OR FM Assocs.

Minister, Elders & Deacons of Reformed Protestant Dutch Church v. 198 Broadway, Inc. , 76 N.Y.2d 411, 413…

Providian National Bank v. Forrester

We find no procedural infirmity in the record. Capoccia was advised of Supreme Court's intention to consider…