174 A.D.2d 1024

Robert D. O’Connell, P. C., Appellant, et al., Plaintiff, v Schlegel Corporation et al., Respondents, and Charles P. Schlegel, II, Intervenor-Respondent.

(Appeal No. 1.)

—Order unanimously affirmed with costs. Memorandum: In affirming the order of Supreme Court, we note our acknowledgement of the concession by intervenor-defendant Charles P. Schlegel, II that issues pertaining to stock ownership and/or entitlement to merger consideration have been competently placed in issue *1025by plaintiffs. Moreover, we perceive no error in the strategy employed by Supreme Court in managing this litigation. By granting plaintiffs’ motion for leave to amend their reply to intervenor-defendant’s counterclaim, the court placed both plaintiffs and intervenor-defendant in position fully to litigate their dispute regarding stock ownership and/or entitlement to merger consideration. (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Monroe County, Boehm, J.—Intervention.) Present—Dillon, P. J., Doerr, Balio, Lawton and Davis, JJ.

O’Connell v. Schlegel Corp.
174 A.D.2d 1024

Case Details

Name
O’Connell v. Schlegel Corp.
Decision Date
Jun 7, 1991
Citations

174 A.D.2d 1024

Jurisdiction
New York

References

Referencing

Nothing yet... Still searching!

Referenced By

Nothing yet... Still searching!