General

Aleksandr Shafer et al., Respondents, v. David M. Friedman, Appellant

269 A.D.2d 381702 N.Y.S.2d 875·New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division·2000·NY

Brief incoming

Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.

Opinion

Aleksandr Shafer et al., Respondents, v David M. Friedman, Appellant. [702 NYS2d 875] [MAJORITY] —In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (M. Carson, J.), dated January 6, 1999, which denied his motion pursuant to CPLR 306-b and 214 to dismiss the complaint. Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs. Contrary to the defendant’s contention, the current version of CPLR 306-b, which became effective on January 1, 1998 (L 1997, ch 476, § 2), may not be applied retroactively (see, Matter of Ulster Hgts. Prop. v Assessor of Town of Orangetown, 261 AD2d 478; Connor v Deas, 255 AD2d 287). Bracken, J. P., Santucci, Thompson and S. Miller, JJ., concur.