Bergstol v. Town of Monroe

CourtNew York Supreme Court Appellate Division
PartiesKENNETH BERGSTOL, Appellant,<BR>v.<BR>TOWN OF MONROE, Respondent.
Decision Date05 May 2003

305 A.D.2d 349
762 N.Y.S.2d 879

KENNETH BERGSTOL, Appellant,
v.
TOWN OF MONROE, Respondent.

Decided May 5, 2003.


Altman, J.P., Smith, McGinity and Cozier, JJ., concur.

Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in opposition thereto, and upon the argument of the appeal, it is

Ordered that the motion is denied.

[305 A.D.2d 350]

It is axiomatic that this Court may take judicial notice of its own orders in related actions (see Lefkowitz v Lurie, 253 AD2d 855; Brandes Meat Corp. v Cromer, 146 AD2d 666). Accordingly, the respondent's motion to strike the appellant's brief or portions of the appellant's brief which refer to this Court's order in the prior action involving these parties is denied.

To continue reading

Request your trial
2 practice notes
  • A.P. v. F.L., No. 471/2012.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court (New York)
    • November 15, 2017
    ...with N.P. from 10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on alternate Saturdays and Sundays beginning February 9, 2013 (see Bergstol v. Town of Monroe, 305 A.D.2d 349, 350 [2d Dept 2003] ; see also In re Adolph v. Lynn, 117 ASD3d 495, 496 FN1 [1st Dept 2014]; People v. England, 48 AD3d 838 [3rd Dept 2008] ).......
  • Bergstol v. Town of Monroe
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court Appellate Division
    • May 5, 2003
    ...the Supreme Court, Orange County, for further proceedings consistent herewith. This action was commenced by Kenneth Bergstol to review [305 A.D.2d 349] the adoption by the Town of Monroe of Local Law No. 1 (2002), which effectively prohibited multiple dwelling groups in RR-1.0 and RR-1.5 zo......
2 cases
  • A.P. v. F.L., No. 471/2012.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court (New York)
    • November 15, 2017
    ...with N.P. from 10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on alternate Saturdays and Sundays beginning February 9, 2013 (see Bergstol v. Town of Monroe, 305 A.D.2d 349, 350 [2d Dept 2003] ; see also In re Adolph v. Lynn, 117 ASD3d 495, 496 FN1 [1st Dept 2014]; People v. England, 48 AD3d 838 [3rd Dept 2008] ).......
  • Bergstol v. Town of Monroe
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court Appellate Division
    • May 5, 2003
    ...the Supreme Court, Orange County, for further proceedings consistent herewith. This action was commenced by Kenneth Bergstol to review [305 A.D.2d 349] the adoption by the Town of Monroe of Local Law No. 1 (2002), which effectively prohibited multiple dwelling groups in RR-1.0 and RR-1.5 zo......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT