Hyperlawhypertext legal database Spano v. Riley 242 A.D.2d 934

← Cases

Spano v. Riley

242 A.D.2d 934 Court N.Y. App. Div. Decision date 1997-09-30 Docket Appeal No. 1 English

Contents

Majority

p. 934
Leonard C. Spano, as Administrator of the Estate of Mark A. Spano, Deceased, Appellant, v Robert L. Riley et al., Defendants, and Mackenzie Smith Michell & Hughes Law Firm et al., Respondents.
(Appeal No. 1.)
[665 NYS2d 364]

Order and judgment unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: Supreme Court properly granted the motions of defendants to dismiss the complaint pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (5) and (7) and properly denied plaintiffs motions for a change of venue and leave to amend the complaint. The court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in enjoining plaintiff from instituting further actions or proceedings as a pro se litigant without obtaining prior judicial approval (see, Dubroff v Norych & Tallis, 220 AD2d 480 , 481; Spremo v Babchik, 216 AD2d 382 , lv denied 86 NY2d 709 , cert denied 516 US 1161 ). (Appeal from Order and Judgment of Supreme Court, Onondaga County, Major, J.—Dismiss Complaint.) Present—Green, J. P., Pine, Doerr, Balio and Fallon, JJ.

Cases cited