Edge Management Consulting, Inc. v. Blank, 25 A.D.3d 364 (2006)
- Citation
- Edge Management Consulting, Inc. v. Blank, 25 A.D.3d 364 (2006)
- Parent Document
- Edge Management Consulting, Inc. v. Blank, 25 A.D.3d 364 (2006)
- Jurisdiction
- New York (state)
- Effective Date
- 2006-01-10
Other Sections in This Document (22)
- Edge Management Consulting, Inc. v. Blank, 25 A.D.3d 364 (2006)
- Edge Management Consulting, Inc. v. Blank, 25 A.D.3d 364 (2006)
- Edge Management Consulting, Inc. v. Blank, 25 A.D.3d 364 (2006)
- Edge Management Consulting, Inc. v. Blank, 25 A.D.3d 364 (2006)
- Edge Management Consulting, Inc. v. Blank, 25 A.D.3d 364 (2006)
- Edge Management Consulting, Inc. v. Blank, 25 A.D.3d 364 (2006)
- Edge Management Consulting, Inc. v. Blank, 25 A.D.3d 364 (2006)
- Edge Management Consulting, Inc. v. Blank, 25 A.D.3d 364 (2006)
- Edge Management Consulting, Inc. v. Blank, 25 A.D.3d 364 (2006)
- Edge Management Consulting, Inc. v. Blank, 25 A.D.3d 364 (2006)
- Edge Management Consulting, Inc. v. Blank, 25 A.D.3d 364 (2006)
- Edge Management Consulting, Inc. v. Blank, 25 A.D.3d 364 (2006)
- Edge Management Consulting, Inc. v. Blank, 25 A.D.3d 364 (2006)
- Edge Management Consulting, Inc. v. Blank, 25 A.D.3d 364 (2006)
- Edge Management Consulting, Inc. v. Blank, 25 A.D.3d 364 (2006)
- Edge Management Consulting, Inc. v. Blank, 25 A.D.3d 364 (2006)
- Edge Management Consulting, Inc. v. Blank, 25 A.D.3d 364 (2006)
- Edge Management Consulting, Inc. v. Blank, 25 A.D.3d 364 (2006)
- Edge Management Consulting, Inc. v. Blank, 25 A.D.3d 364 (2006)
- Edge Management Consulting, Inc. v. Blank, 25 A.D.3d 364 (2006)
- Edge Management Consulting, Inc. v. Blank, 25 A.D.3d 364 (2006)
- Edge Management Consulting, Inc. v. Blank, 25 A.D.3d 364 (2006)
Full Text
816 charsIrmas’s contention that the court erred by allowing the submission and consideration of an “Amended Affirmation in Opposition” to her motion to dismiss is also baseless. The Blank Trust’s Amended Affirmation was served on July 20, 2004, in accordance with the stipulation signed by all counsel, which provided that opposition papers to the motions to dismiss were due on July 21, 2004. Additionally, under CPLR 2214 (c), papers submitted in accordance with the service and filing requirements of CPLR 2214 (a) and (b) are read by the court. The Amended Affirmation was served more than seven days prior to the July 28, 2004 return date, which satisfies the relevant requirement of CPLR 2214 (b). Irmas was granted additional time to reply to the Amended Affirmation as well, thus ameliorating any possible prejudice.