Case Name: Stephen DiMarco, Appellant, v. Patrick J. Bombard, Individually and as a Member of Bombard Buick Pontiac GMC Truck, LLC, et al., Respondents. (Action No. 1.); Stephen DiMarco, Appellant, v. Patrick J. Bombard, Individually and as a Member of 100 Main Street, LLC, et al., Respondents. (Action No. 2.)
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 2009-11-13
Citations: 67 A.D.3d 1459
Docket Number: 
Parties: Stephen DiMarco, Appellant, v Patrick J. Bombard, Individually and as a Member of Bombard Buick Pontiac GMC Truck, LLC, et al., Respondents. (Action No. 1.) Stephen DiMarco, Appellant, v Patrick J. Bombard, Individually and as a Member of 100 Main Street, LLC, et al., Respondents. (Action No. 2.)
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 67
Pages: 1459–1459

Head Matter:
Stephen DiMarco, Appellant, v Patrick J. Bombard, Individually and as a Member of Bombard Buick Pontiac GMC Truck, LLC, et al., Respondents. (Action No. 1.) Stephen DiMarco, Appellant, v Patrick J. Bombard, Individually and as a Member of 100 Main Street, LLC, et al., Respondents. (Action No. 2.)
[887 NYS2d 922]

Opinion:
Motion for reargument granted and, upon reargument, the memorandum and order entered October 2, 2009 (66 AD3d 1341 [2009]) is amended by adding the following sentence as the last sentence of the memorandum: "Even assuming, arguendo, that the affidavit of plaintiffs attorney, which purports to outline the terms of the stipulation, constitutes a sufficient record upon which we may review plaintiffs contention that the court erred in vacating the settlement agreement, we would nevertheless affirm." Present—Scudder, EJ., Hurlbutt, Peradotto, Green and Gorski, JJ.