Case Name: Hudson Electrical Contractors, Inc., Plaintiff, v. Merriam Gateway Associates, Defendant. (And a Third-Party Action.) (Action No. 1.) York/Hunter, Inc., Respondent, et al., Plaintiffs, v. Merriam Gateway Associates et al., Appellants. (Action No. 2.)
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 2001-01-29
Citations: 279 A.D.2d 611
Docket Number: 
Parties: Hudson Electrical Contractors, Inc., Plaintiff, v Merriam Gateway Associates, Defendant. (And a Third-Party Action.) (Action No. 1.) York/Hunter, Inc., Respondent, et al., Plaintiffs, v Merriam Gateway Associates et al., Appellants. (Action No. 2.)
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 279
Pages: 611–611

Head Matter:
Hudson Electrical Contractors, Inc., Plaintiff, v Merriam Gateway Associates, Defendant. (And a Third-Party Action.) (Action No. 1.) York/Hunter, Inc., Respondent, et al., Plaintiffs, v Merriam Gateway Associates et al., Appellants. (Action No. 2.)
[719 NYS2d 881]

Opinion:
In two related actions to enforce a judgment of the Superior Court of New Jersey, Sussex County, filed June 12, 1997, the defendants in Action No. 2, Merriam Gateway Associates, a New Jersey Partnership, and Benjamin Oratz, appeal from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Durante, J.), dated October 18, 1999, as denied their motion to dismiss that action.
Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.
Contrary to the appellants' contention, Action No. 2 is not barred by the doctrine of collateral estoppel (see, Kaufman v Eli Lilly & Co., 65 NY2d 449).
The appellants' remaining contentions are either without merit or improperly raised for the first time on appeal (see, Block v Magee, 146 AD2d 730). Ritter, J. P., Friedmann, H. Miller and Smith, JJ., concur.