History
  • No items yet
midpage
Peterson v. Youngelman
23 A.D.3d 446
| N.Y. App. Div. | 2005
|
Check Treatment

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for breach of contract, the defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Berler, J.), dated September 22, 2004, which denied his motion, among other things, pursuant to CPLR 325 (b) to remove to the Supreme Court three separate actions pending against him in the District Court, Suffolk County.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

Contrary to the defendant’s contention, the three actions commenced by the plaintiff in the District Court, Suffolk County, in addition to the defendant’s proposed counterclaims, are within the jurisdiction of that court, irrespective of whether they qualify as “small claims” within the meaning of Uniform District Court Act (hereinafter UDCA) article 18 (see UDCA 202, 208 [b]; 1805 [b]; 2501). Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly denied the motion.

In light of our determination, we do not reach the defendant’s remaining contentions. Florio, J.P., Goldstein, Fisher and Covello, JJ., concur.

Case Details

Case Name: Peterson v. Youngelman
Court Name: Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Date Published: Nov 14, 2005
Citation: 23 A.D.3d 446
Court Abbreviation: N.Y. App. Div.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.