Narrative Opinion Summary
In the case of Lew v. Sobel, the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York reviewed an appeal involving Mark Lew and the defendants, focusing on two main issues: the denial of Lew's motion to prevent the defendants from initiating new litigation against him, and his request to withdraw an appeal from an earlier order. The court permitted Lew to withdraw his appeal regarding the February 23, 2015, order. Moreover, it partially reversed the September 3, 2014, order, granting Lew's request to enjoin the defendants from commencing new litigation without obtaining court permission. This decision was contingent on Lew's commitment to a similar restriction against initiating new lawsuits without court approval. The court highlighted the protracted history of vexatious litigation between the parties since 2003, necessitating mutual litigation restrictions. If Lew fails to submit the required stipulation within 30 days, the original order from September 3, 2014, will remain effective. The defendants' additional arguments were dismissed as either meritless or improperly raised. The decision was unanimously concurred by Judges Hall, Sgroi, Maltese, and Duffy.
Legal Issues Addressed
Consideration of Vexatious Litigation Historysubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The decision takes into account the prolonged history of vexatious litigation between the parties since 2003.
Reasoning: The court noted the extensive vexatious litigation history between both parties since 2003, emphasizing the need for mutual restrictions on litigation.
Enjoining Future Litigationsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court allows Lew to enjoin the defendants from starting new lawsuits against him without court permission, contingent upon a reciprocal agreement.
Reasoning: Additionally, it reversed the September 3, 2014 order in part, allowing Lew to enjoin the defendants from commencing litigation without prior court permission.
Failure to Comply with Court Conditionssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: Lew must file the required stipulation within a specified timeframe, or the original court order will stand.
Reasoning: If Lew fails to file the required stipulation within 30 days of receiving the decision, the original order from September 3, 2014, will be upheld.
Mutual Litigation Restrictionssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court's decision emphasizes the need for both parties to agree to mutual restrictions on initiating further litigation.
Reasoning: However, this grant is conditional upon Lew providing a written stipulation that he too would be enjoined from initiating any new litigation against the defendants without similar court approval.