Arts4All, Ltd. v. Hancock 12 N.Y.3d 846, 909 N.E.2d 83, 881 N.Y.S.2d 390

12 N.Y.3d 846 • 909 N.E.2d 83 • 881 N.Y.S.2d 390

[909 NE2d 83, 881 NYS2d 390]

Arts4All, Ltd., Appellant, et al., Plaintiff, v Judith L. Hancock, Respondent and Counterclaim Plaintiff-Respondent, et al., Additional Counterclaim Defendants.

Decided May 12, 2009

APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL

Zachary R. Greenhill, P.C., New York City (Zachary R. Greenhill of counsel), for appellant.

Trachtenberg Rodes & Friedberg LLP, New York City (David G. Trachtenberg of counsel), for respondent.

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division, insofar as appealed from, *847should be affirmed, with costs, and the certified question not answered as unnecessary.

The courts below applied the correct legal standards, properly considered all the facts and circumstances of the case, and did not abuse their discretion in dismissing plaintiffs’ remaining cause of action pursuant to CPLR 3126 (3) (see Kihl v Pfeffer, 94 NY2d 118, 123 [1999]).

Judges Ciparick, Graffeo, Read, Smith, Pigott and Jones concur in memorandum; Chief Judge Lippman taking no part.

On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.11 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.11), order, insofar as appealed from, affirmed, etc.

Arts4All, Ltd. v. Hancock
12 N.Y.3d 846 • 909 N.E.2d 83 • 881 N.Y.S.2d 390

Case Details

Name
Arts4All, Ltd. v. Hancock
Decision Date
May 12, 2009
Citations

12 N.Y.3d 846

909 N.E.2d 83

881 N.Y.S.2d 390

Jurisdiction
New York
Court
New York Court of Appeals

References

Referencing

Nothing yet... Still searching!

Referenced By

Nothing yet... Still searching!