You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

Norstar Bank of Upstate NY v. OFFICE CONTROL SYS., INC.

Citations: 78 N.Y.2d 1110; 578 N.Y.S.2d 868; 586 N.E.2d 51; 1991 N.Y. LEXIS 4986

Court: New York Court of Appeals; November 24, 1991; New York; State Supreme Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

The Court of Appeals of the State of New York addressed the case of Norstar Bank of Upstate NY v. Office Control Systems, Inc., with Robert Winig as the appellant. The court submitted the matter on October 7, 1991, and rendered its decision on November 25, 1991. The key ruling was the dismissal of Winig's motion for leave to appeal due to its untimeliness. Although the cover letter accompanying the Appellate Division order did not explicitly indicate that the order was entered, the order itself was stamped with the date of entry and the clerk's name, satisfying the requirements for service. Consequently, the service of the cover letter and the Appellate Division order started the timer for Winig to file his motion for leave to appeal. Since he filed his motion more than 35 days after this service, it was deemed untimely under CPLR 5513(b) and CPLR 2103(b)(2).

Legal Issues Addressed

Service Requirements for Order Entry under CPLR 2103(b)(2)

Application: The court found that the stamped date of entry and the clerk's name on the order itself satisfied service requirements, thus starting the time to file a motion for leave to appeal.

Reasoning: Although the cover letter accompanying the Appellate Division order did not explicitly indicate that the order was entered, the order itself was stamped with the date of entry and the clerk's name, satisfying the requirements for service.

Timeliness of Motion for Leave to Appeal under CPLR 5513(b)

Application: The court applied CPLR 5513(b) to determine that Robert Winig's motion for leave to appeal was untimely as it was filed more than 35 days after service of the order.

Reasoning: Since he filed his motion more than 35 days after this service, it was deemed untimely under CPLR 5513(b) and CPLR 2103(b)(2).