Summary
The Appellate Division, Fourth Department, affirmed an order of the Supreme Court granting a motion to dismiss the plaintiff's complaint. The court held that the trial court properly dismissed the action because the plaintiff filed it without obtaining prior leave of court, in violation of previous orders prohibiting him from commencing litigation on the subject matter of a 2005 settlement stipulation. The appellate court noted its prior rulings addressing this restriction and declined to address the plaintiff's remaining contentions.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the Supreme Court properly granted defendant's motion to dismiss the complaint because the plaintiff filed without the required leave of court under the 2005 stipulation.
Holdings
- The appellate division affirmed that the Supreme Court properly granted the motion to dismiss because the plaintiff filed the complaint without prior leave of court as required by the 2005 stipulation.
Factual background
The plaintiff's action was based on a 2005 stipulation in which he agreed to settle various lawsuits. The plaintiff filed the complaint without obtaining the leave of court required by that stipulation, and prior orders had prohibited such filings.
Procedural history
The Supreme Court, Oneida County entered an order on October 26, 2023 dismissing the complaint. The plaintiff appealed; the Appellate Division affirmed the dismissal.