People v. Glaster, 132 A.D.3d 584 (N.Y. App. Div. 2015). · Go Syfert
Search
People v. Glaster, 132 A.D.3d 584 (N.Y. App. Div. 2015). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
G Cite
cited 2× by 1 distinct case · …equitable estoppel defeats an otherwise valid statute of limitations defense only where the party invoking the doctrine has reasonably relied on the deceptive conduct alleged to have given rise to the estoppel. ⚠ not in text
6 citation events (6 in the last 25 years) across 3 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Elsa Zegelstein Revocable Living Trust v. Nanto MK Corp. (nysupctnewyork, 2024-11-12)
Top citers, strongest first. 3 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Elsa Zegelstein Revocable Living Trust v. Nanto MK Corp.
N.Y. Sup. Ct., New York Cty. · 2024 · confidence medium
(See K-Bay Plaza, LLC v Kmart Corp., 132 AD3d 584, 591 [1st Dept 2015] [holding that a tenant should have been granted summary judgment on a landlord's account stated cause of action "given the parties' dispute over the amount charged for rent escalation"]; Reade v Cardinal Health, Inc., 12 AD3d 224, 225 [1st Dept 2004 ["Since the 4 While defendants asserted the affirmative defense that The Zegelstein Revocable Trust does not have standing and is not a proper party, they have not raised such argument in opposition to summary judgment.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Norddeutsche Landesbank Girozentrale v. Tilton
N.Y. App. Div. · 2017 · confidence medium
While plaintiffs contend that only the possibility of equity kickers was disclosed, the ev-identiary materials demonstrate that the Funds were “anything but typical [CDOs], for better or for worse” and had or would obtain majority or 100% stakes in many portfolio companies, putting plaintiffs on notice that the Funds were or would be operating far differently from what they purportedly believed, and that recovering on their investment would depend, at least in part, on “the sale of [the Portfolio] Companies” (see K-Bay Plaza, LLC v Kmart Corp., 132 AD3d 584, 590 [1st Dept 2015] [the pl…
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Aozora Bank, Ltd. v. Deutsche Bank Securities Inc.
N.Y. App. Div. · 2016 · confidence medium
The proposed amended complaint does not cure the statute of limitations defects in the original complaint, as it does not gainsay that Aozora was on inquiry notice of alleged fraud more than two years before it filed the summons with notice (see K-Bay Plaza, LLC v Kmart Corp., 132 AD3d 584, 590 [1st Dept 2015]; Meimeteas v Carter Ledyard & Milburn LLP, 105 AD3d 643 [1st Dept 2013]).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
The People of the State of New York, Respondent,
v.
Derrick Glaster, Appellant
15983 4658/11.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York.
Oct 27, 2015.
132 A.D.3d 584
Tom, Renwick, Andrias, Moskowitz, Manzanet-Daniels.
Published

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Lewis Bart Stone, J., at suppression hearing; Jill Konviser, J., at plea and sentencing), rendered on or about April 30, 2013, unanimously affirmed.

Application by defendant’s counsel to withdraw as counsel is granted (see Anders v California, 386 US 738 [1967]; People v Saunders, 52 AD2d 833 [1st Dept 1976]). We have reviewed this record and agree with defendant’s assigned counsel that there are no nonfrivolous points which could be raised on this appeal.

Pursuant to Criminal Procedure Law § 460.20, defendant may apply for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals by making application to the Chief Judge of that Court and by submitting such application to the Clerk of that Court or to a Justice of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of this Department on reasonable notice to the respondent within 30 days after service of a copy of this order.

Denial of the application for permission to appeal by the judge or justice first applied to is final and no new application may thereafter be made to any other judge or justice.

Concur— Tom, J.P., Renwick, Andrias, Moskowitz and Manzanet-Daniels, JJ.