YADGAROV v. DEKEL

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department.

Dec 15, 2003

Judgment

CaseIQ

DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.

Contrary to the plaintiff's contention, his motion was premature since substantial discovery remains outstanding ( see generally Ross v. Curtis-Palmer Hydro-Elec. Co., 81 N.Y.2d 494, 506). Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly denied the motion.

SMITH, J.P., McGINITY, LUCIANO and TOWNES, JJ., concur.