Aldalali v Sungold Assoc. Ltd. Partnership

Annotate this Case
Aldalali v Sungold Assoc. Ltd. Partnership 2019 NY Slip Op 03920 Decided on May 21, 2019 Appellate Division, First Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law ยง 431. This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.

Decided on May 21, 2019
Acosta, P.J., Richter, Manzanet-Daniels, Webber, Kern, JJ.
9368N 25776/14E 43140/15E 43212/16E 43195/17E

[*1] Deya Aldalali, Plaintiff,

v

Sungold Associates Limited Partnership, et al., Defendants.



Sungold Associates Limited Partnership, Third-Party Plaintiff-Respondent,

v

HKSM G.C. Co. Inc., Third-Party Defendant-Appellant.



Sungold Associates Limited Partnership, Second Third-Party Plaintiff,

v

Saba Live Poultry Corp, doing business as Saba (2) Live Poultry (Halal), et al., Second Third-Party Defendants.



Sungold Associates Limited Partnership, Third Third-Party Plaintiff-Respondent,

v

Henry Kessler, Third Third-Party Defendant-Appellant.



White & McSpedon, P.C., New York (Joseph W. Sands of counsel), for appellants.

Gallo Vitucci Klar LLP, New York (Kimberly A. Ricciardi of counsel), for respondent.



Appeal from order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Donna Mills, J.), entered August 28, 2018, which, inter alia, denied the motion of third-party defendant HKSM G.C. Co. Inc. (HKSM) and third third-party defendant Henry Kessler to renew and reargue a prior motion for partial summary judgment, unanimously dismissed, without costs, as taken from a nonappealable paper.

Although denominated a motion to renew and reargue, HKSM and Kessler's motion only [*2]sought reargument of their prior summary judgment motion, and no appeal lies from the denial of a motion to reargue (see Northern Assur. Co. of Am. v Holden , 179 AD2d 569 [1st Dept 1992]).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER

OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.

ENTERED: MAY 21, 2019

DEPUTY CLERK



Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.