Aievoli v. Aievoli

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Aievoli v. Aievoli

249 A.D.2d 253, 670 N.Y.S.2d 361, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3641

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedApril 6, 1998

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 249 A.D.2d 253 (Aievoli v. Aievoli) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Aievoli v. Aievoli, 249 A.D.2d 253, 670 N.Y.S.2d 361, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3641 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action for a divorce and ancillary relief, the defendant wife appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Richmond County (Meyer, J.H.O.), dated February 10, 1997, which, upon the oral application of the plaintiff husband, directed that “all the attorneys and any representatives of their law firms and the parties herein, are hereby restrained and enjoined from communicating with any member of the news media and/or representatives of same” with respect to “any aspect” of the case.

Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, without costs or disbursements.

The order appealed from did not decide a motion made on notice. No appeal as of right lies therefrom (see, CPLR 5701 [a] [2]; Sherwood v Roper, 237 AD2d 275). No application has been made for permission to appeal, nor are we inclined to grant leave to appeal under the circumstances of this case, considering the sparseness of the record (see, Matter of Bergmann v Berger, 218 AD2d 768; Matter of Hartman v Smith, 207 AD2d 345). Rosenblatt, J. P., Ritter, Sullivan and Goldstein, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

—In an action for a divorce and ancillary relief, the defendant wife appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Richmond County (Meyer, J.H.O.), dated February 10, 1997, which, upon the oral application of the plaintiff husband, directed that “all the attorneys and any representatives of their law firms and the parties herein, are hereby restrained and enjoined from communicating with any member of the news media and/or representatives of same” with respect to “any aspect” of the case.

Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, without costs or disbursements.

The order appealed from did not decide a motion made on notice. No appeal as of right lies therefrom (see, CPLR 5701 [a] [2]; Sherwood v Roper, 237 AD2d 275). No application has been made for permission to appeal, nor are we inclined to grant leave to appeal under the circumstances of this case, considering the sparseness of the record (see, Matter of Bergmann v Berger, 218 AD2d 768; Matter of Hartman v Smith, 207 AD2d 345). Rosenblatt, J. P., Ritter, Sullivan and Goldstein, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

249 A.D.2d 253, 670 N.Y.S.2d 361, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3641, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/aievoli-v-aievoli-nyappdiv-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack