HCE Associates v. 3000 Watermill Lane Realty Corp.
| Decision Date | 31 May 1991 |
| Citation | 570 N.Y.S.2d 642,173 A.D.2d 774 |
| Parties | HCE ASSOCIATES, etc., Respondent, v. 3000 WATERMILL LANE REALTY CORP., Appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
D'Amato, Forchelli, Libert, Schwartz, Mineo & Joseph F. Carlino, Mineola (Jack L. Libert and William J. Fitzpatrick, of counsel), for appellant.
Stafford & Toner, Garden City (Michael P. Stafford, of counsel), for respondent.
Before MANGANO, P.J., and BROWN, SULLIVAN, HARWOOD and MILLER, JJ.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
In an action to permanently enjoin the defendant from extinguishing an easement, the defendant appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (O'Shaughnessy, J.), entered October 30, 1989, as compelled it to comply with the terms of a stipulation entered into in open court on June 21, 1984.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.
The plaintiff moved by order to show cause to hold the defendant in contempt of court for failure to comply with a prior order of the court. The defendant contends that the court improvidently exercised its discretion by ordering it to comply with a stipulation between the parties dated June 21, 1984, upon the return of the order to show cause. We disagree.
The order to show cause included a general prayer for "such other, further and different relief as may be equitable". Generally, a notice of motion or order to show cause must state the relief demanded and the grounds therefor (see, CPLR 2214[a]. The court may grant relief, pursuant to a general prayer contained in the notice of motion or order to show cause, other than that specifically asked for, to such extent as is warranted by the facts plainly appearing on the papers on both sides (see, Thompson v. Erie Railway Co., 45 N.Y. 468; Kellogg v. Commodore Hotel, 187 Misc. 319, 64 N.Y.S.2d 131). It may do so if the relief granted is not too dramatically unlike the relief sought, and if the proof offered supports it and the court is satisfied that no one has been prejudiced by the formal omission to demand it specifically (Siegel, Practice Commentaries, McKinney's Cons. Laws of N.Y., Book 7B, CPLR C2214:5 at 84). Whether to grant such relief is discretionary with the court (see, Van Slyke v. Hyatt, 46 N.Y. 259; Randall v. Randall, 139 App.Div. 674, 676, 124 N.Y.S. 524).
The defendant's argument that it was denied the right to fully litigate the issues relevant to the relief granted is spurious. The relief...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Capital One Bank (USA) v. Koralik
...permitted the trial court's granting of summary judgment on the basis of an account stated. See HCE Assoc. v. 3000 Watermill Lane Rlty. Corp., 173 A.D.2d 774, 570 N.Y.S.2d 642 (2d Dept.1991) ; Patrick M. Connors, Practice Commentaries, McKinney's Cons. Laws of N.Y., Book 7B, CPLR C2214:5; c......
-
1644 Broadway LLC v. Jimenez
...court is satisfied that no one is prejudiced by it (Shaw v. RPA Assoc., LLC., 75 A.D.2d 634, 906 N.Y.S.2d 574;HCE Assoc., v. 3000 Watermill Lane Realty Corp., 173 A.D.2d 774, 570 N.Y .S.642;see also Gefferner v. Mercy Med. Center, 83 A.D3d 998, 922 N.Y.S.2d 470 [AD, 2nd Dept., 2011] where i......
-
Tirado v. Miller
...court is satisfied that no party is prejudiced ( see Frankel v. Stavsky, 40 A.D.3d 918, 838 N.Y.S.2d 90; HCE Assoc. v. 3000 Watermill Lane Realty Corp., 173 A.D.2d 774, 570 N.Y.S.2d 642; Lanaris v. Mutual Benefit Life Ins. Co., 9 A.D.2d 1015, 194 N.Y.S.2d 718). The relief granted, of quashi......
-
Kearney v. Kearney
...to such extent as is warranted by the facts plainly appearing on the papers on both sides); HCE Assoc. v. 3000 Watermill Lane Realty Corp., 173 A.D.2d 774, 774, 570 N.Y.S.2d 642 (2d Dept.1991). In Tirado v. Miller, 75 A.D.3d 153, 158, 901 N.Y.S.2d 358 (2nd Dept.2010), the court noted: Gener......