| Cardenas v Bridges |
| 2026 NY Slip Op 50168(U) [88 Misc 3d 127(A)] |
| Decided on February 18, 2026 |
| Appellate Term, First Department |
| Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. |
| This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports. |
Plaintiff appeals from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, New York County (Jose A. Padilla, Jr., J.), entered August 22, 2025, which denied his motions to, among other things, amend the complaint and to reopen the case.
Per Curiam.
Order (Jose A. Padilla, Jr., J.), entered August 22, 2025, affirmed, with $10 costs.
Civil Court properly denied plaintiff's motions seeking various relief. This action was previously terminated by a so-ordered stipulation of discontinuance executed by the parties (see Lazare v Pfizer, Inc., 257 AD2d 498 [1999], lv dismissed 93 NY2d 1000 [1999]). A court lacks jurisdiction to entertain a motion after the action has been unequivocally terminated by the execution of "an express, unconditional stipulation of discontinuance" (Teitelbaum Holdings v Gold, 48 NY2d 51, 56 [1979]).
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.