frivolous claim in New York

2014Gerstein v Gerstein, 302 AD2d 447, 449 [2003]; Morrissey v Morrissey, 259 AD2d 472 [1999]; Sassower v Signorelli, 99 AD2d 358 [1984]).

2014Gerstein v Gerstein, 302 AD2d 447, 449 [2003]; Morrissey v Morrissey, 259 AD2d 472 [1999]; Sassower v Signorelli, 99 AD2d 358 [1984]).

1960(Matter of Wenger & Co. v. Propper Silk Hosiery Mills, 239 N. Y. 199, 202 .) A dispute is not arbitrable if it is grounded on an asserted interpretation of the agreement contrary to unambiguous provisions thereof.

1958(Matter of Wenger & Co. v. Propper Silk Hosiery Mills, 239 N. Y. 199, 202 .) A dispute is not arbitrable if it is grounded on an asserted interpretation of the agreement contrary to unambiguous provisions thereof.

2025For example, a judge "has both the duty and the power to protect the courts, citizens and opposing parties from the deleterious impact of repetitive, unfounded pro se litigation" ( Muka v New York State Bar Assn., 120 Misc 2d 897 (Sup Ct, Tompkins County 1983), quoting People v. Dunlap, 623 P2d 408, 410 [Colo 1981]). "[A] litigious plaintiff pressing a frivolous claim can be extremely costly to the defendant and can waste an inordinate amount of court time, time that this court and the trial courts can ill afford to lose.

2025For example, a judge "has both the duty and the power to protect the courts, citizens and opposing parties from the deleterious impact of repetitive, unfounded pro se litigation" (<i>Muka v New York State Bar Assn.,</i> 120 Misc 2d 897 (Sup Ct, Tompkins County 1983), quoting <i>People v. Dunlap,</i> 623 P2d 408, 410 [Colo 1981]).</p> <p>"[A] litigious plaintiff pressing a frivolous claim can be extremely costly to the defendant and can waste an inordinate amount of court time, time that this court and the trial courts can ill afford to lose.

2025(M&T Bank v Friedmann, 217 AD3d at 937 ).

2024Additionally, "[i]n light of evidence that the [defendant] was pressing a frivolous claim, thereby abusing the judicial process and creating unnecessary litigation, the [Supreme Court] properly awarded counsel fees" to the plaintiff ( Weissman v Weissman , 116 AD3d at 850 ).

2009On the affidavit of the contestant’s attorney in this proceeding, one fact is very plain, to-wit: That he has no facts, absolutely none, on which to found a contest, and his only hope was evidently grounded upon some notion that delay and expense might in some way benefit him; or that the subscribing witnesses, either or both, might turn out to be forgetful or fraudulent persons.” (15 NY Civ Pro Rep at 275.) Furthermore, CPLR 8303-a (c) (ii) defines a frivolous claim as one which was “commenced or continued in bad faith without any reasonable basis in law or fact and could not be supported by

2007The petitioner simply did not articulate any basis for her allegations and "demonstrate that a nonfrivolous controversy as to paternity exists" ( Prowda v. Wilner , 217 AD2d 287, 289 , 634 NYS2d 866, 868 ).

2007The petitioner simply did not articulate any basis for her allegations and "demonstrate that a nonfrivolous controversy as to paternity exists" ( Prowda v. Wilner , 217 AD2d 287, 289 , 634 NYS2d 866, 868 ).

1992Pfeifer v Christian Science Bd. of Directors, 62 Ill App 3d 918, 379 NE2d 653 ; Eismann v Miller, 101 Idaho 692 , 619 P2d 1145 ).

1992Pfeifer v Christian Science Bd. of Directors, 62 Ill App 3d 918, 379 NE2d 653 ; Eismann v Miller, 101 Idaho 692 , 619 P2d 1145 ).

1992Supporting this construction is the observation that CPLR 8303-a (a) has been applied in relation to constituent parts of a case, indicating a literal interpretation should be given to the phrase "an action or claim * * * or a counterclaim, defense or cross claim.” Such instances include the award of CPLR 8303-a costs in favor of a third-party defendant (Jacobson v Chase Manhattan Bank, 174 AD2d 709 [2d Dept 1991] [award of $9,509 under CPLR 8303-a]), and for a frivolous defense as to liability (Aurnou v Craig, 184 AD2d 1048 [4th Dept 1992]).

1992Supporting this construction is the observation that CPLR 8303-a (a) has been applied in relation to constituent parts of a case, indicating a literal interpretation should be given to the phrase "an action or claim * * * or a counterclaim, defense or cross claim.” Such instances include the award of CPLR 8303-a costs in favor of a third-party defendant (Jacobson v Chase Manhattan Bank, 174 AD2d 709 [2d Dept 1991] [award of $9,509 under CPLR 8303-a]), and for a frivolous defense as to liability (Aurnou v Craig, 184 AD2d 1048 [4th Dept 1992]).

1992Pfeifer v Christian Science Bd. of Directors, 62 Ill App 3d 918, 379 NE2d 653 ; Eismann v Miller, 101 Idaho 692 , 619 P2d 1145 ).

1986Partnership v Sire Plan, 108 AD2d 435 [case on appeal]; Volkell v Volkell, 112 AD2d 293 ).

1986Partnership v Sire Plan, 108 AD2d 435 [case on appeal]; Volkell v Volkell, 112 AD2d 293 ).

1985Finally, we hold that the court may, in its discretion, invoke its inherent power to require an abusive or neglectful litigant or attorney to pay a sum of money to the opposing party, when such party has suffered by reason of the abusive conduct; alternatively, the judge may direct that such payment be made directly to the court, when it appears that the efficient disposition of the business before it has been impaired by reason of the conduct in question (see, e.g., Campbell v Regency Towers, 76 Misc 2d 33).

1985Where a court does invoke its inherent power to assess a litigious party for pressing a frivolous claim, due process requires that it be done upon fair notice and a reasonable opportunity to be heard (Roadway Express v Piper, supra, 767 ; see also, Financial Penalties Imposed Directly Against Attorneys in Litigation Without Resort to the Contempt Power, 26 UCLA L Rev 855, 857-858).

1977In support of its contention that plaintiffs’ complaint alleges negligent diagnosis or treatment, the defendant County of Nassau relies on the case of McQueen v County of Nassau ( 83 Misc 2d 865 ).