M & K Computer Corp. v. MBS Industries, Inc.
Cases that cite this one
9 later published cases cite this decision.
- Pfanner v. Anderson (New York Supreme Court, Kings County 2024)
- Wilmington Sav. Fund Socy., FSB v. Decatur 1147 LLC (New York Supreme Court, Kings County 2025)
- Ijezie v. Rozenberg (New York Supreme Court, New York County 2024)
- Passeri v. Brody (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2021)
- Hilarion-Mahotiere v. Metz (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2020)
- Korn v. Korn (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2016)
- In re Joseph J. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2013)
- In re Joseph J. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2013)
- Geneva Temps, Inc. v. New World Communities, Inc. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2005)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
—In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for breach of a noncompetition clause and tortious interference with a contractual relationship, which was commenced in the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Action No. 1), and an action to recover damages for fraud, pending in the Supreme Court, New York County (Action No. 2), the plaintiff in Action No. 1 and the defendants in Action No. 2 appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (McCarty, J.), dated June 3, 1999, which granted the motion of Patrick LoPresti, a defendant in Action No. 1 and the plaintiff in Action No. 2, to consolidate the actions and transferred venue of the consolidated action to New York County.
Ordered that the order is reversed, with costs, the motion is denied, and the Clerk of the Supreme Court, New York County, is directed to deliver to the Clerk of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, all the papers filed in Action No. 1 (see, CPLR 511 [d]).
It was an improvident exercise of discretion to consolidate the action pending in the Supreme Court, Nassau County, with the action pending in the Supreme Court, New York County, since, as a result of the consolidation, certain parties would appear as both plaintiff and defendant in the consolidated action (see, Bass v France, 70 AD2d 849). Moreover, there is an insufficient identity of factual or legal issues in the actions to warrant consolidation (see, CPLR 602 [a]; Mauro Co. v Genesee Val. Group Health Assn., 184 AD2d 998; Dunkin’ Donuts v
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.