Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

VASQUEZ v. NATIONAL SECURITIES CORP., 139 A.D.3d 503 (2016)

Court: Supreme Court of New York Number: innyco20160512284 Visitors: 12
Filed: May 12, 2016
Latest Update: May 12, 2016
Summary: The motion court correctly required notice of the impending dismissal of the putative class action even though the class had not been certified. The court correctly relied on our decision in Avena v Ford Motor Co. ( 85 A.D.2d 149 [1st Dept 1982]), the subsequent amendment of Federal Rules of Civil Procedure rule 23 (e) to restrict the notice requirement to dismissals, discontinuances and compromises of "certified class" actions notwithstanding. The legislature, presumably aware of the law as
More

The motion court correctly required notice of the impending dismissal of the putative class action even though the class had not been certified. The court correctly relied on our decision in Avena v Ford Motor Co. (85 A.D.2d 149 [1st Dept 1982]), the subsequent amendment of Federal Rules of Civil Procedure rule 23 (e) to restrict the notice requirement to dismissals, discontinuances and compromises of "certified class" actions notwithstanding. The legislature, presumably aware of the law as stated in Avena, has not amended CPLR 908 to conform to the federal statute. Although defendant-appellant raises policy arguments in support of its position, its remedy lies with the legislature and not with this Court (see Bright Homes v Wright, 8 N.Y.2d 157, 162 [1960]).

We have considered defendant-appellant's other contentions and find them unavailing.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer