midpage

Polanco v. Lewis Flushing Corp.Polanco v. Lewis Flushing Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Jan 10, 2012
Versions:91 A.D.3d 624
937 N.Y.S.2d 860
937 N.Y.2d 860

As the plaintiff correctly concedes, the sole argument he raises on appeal was not advanced before the Supreme Court. Contrary to the plaintiff‘s contention, his argument does not present a pure question of law that could not have been avoided if raised at the proper juncture (see Matter of Panetta v Carroll, 62 AD3d 1010 [2009]). Accordingly, his argument may not be reached for the first time on appeal (see NYU Hosp. for Joint Diseases v Country Wide Ins. Co., 84 AD3d 1043, 1044 [2011]; Pekich v James E. Lawrence, Inc., 38 AD3d 632, 633 [2007]). Mastro, A.P.J., Angiolillo, Balkin and Chambers, JJ., concur.

Case Details

Case Name: Polanco v. Lewis Flushing Corp.
Court Name: Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Date Published: Jan 10, 2012
Citations: 91 A.D.3d 624; 937 N.Y.S.2d 860; 937 N.Y.2d 860
Court Abbreviation: N.Y. App. Div.
Log In