Alexander v. Kiviranna

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Alexander v. Kiviranna

52 A.D.2d 982, 383 N.Y.S.2d 122, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12861

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

DecidedMay 13, 1976

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 52 A.D.2d 982 (Alexander v. Kiviranna) 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

Alexander v. Kiviranna, 52 A.D.2d 982, 383 N.Y.S.2d 122, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12861 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1976).

Pincite

Opinion

Motion by defendants to dismiss plaintiffs’ appeal, taken as of right, from order of Special Term (1) directing plaintiffs to serve an amended complaint separately stating and numbering each cause of action and (2) requiring plaintiffs to make the complaint more definite and specific as to the causes of action alleged. Motion granted, without costs. Insofar as the order in question requires plaintiff to make a more definite statement in the complaint, it is not appealable as of right (CPLR 5701, subd [b], par 2). In addition, although orders made on motions pursuant to CPLR 3014, seeking to compel a plaintiff to separately state and number his causes of action, have been held appealable (see Consolidated Airborne Systems v Silverman, 23 AD2d 695), we are of the opinion that the instant order does not affect a substantial right of the plaintiffs and therefore would not be appealable as of right under CPLR 5701 (subd [a], par 2, cl [v]). Accordingly, since permission was not obtained, the appeal must be dismissed. Sweeney, J. P., Kane, Mahoney, Larkin and Herlihy, JJ., concur.

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

Motion by defendants to dismiss plaintiffs’ appeal, taken as of right, from order of Special Term (1) directing plaintiffs to serve an amended complaint separately stating and numbering each cause of action and (2) requiring plaintiffs to make the complaint more definite and specific as to the causes of action alleged. Motion granted, without costs. Insofar as the order in question requires plaintiff to make a more definite statement in the complaint, it is not appealable as of right (CPLR 5701, subd [b], par 2). In addition, although orders made on motions pursuant to CPLR 3014, seeking to compel a plaintiff to separately state and number his causes of action, have been held appealable (see Consolidated Airborne Systems v Silverman, 23 AD2d 695), we are of the opinion that the instant order does not affect a substantial right of the plaintiffs and therefore would not be appealable as of right under CPLR 5701 (subd [a], par 2, cl [v]). Accordingly, since permission was not obtained, the appeal must be dismissed. Sweeney, J. P., Kane, Mahoney, Larkin and Herlihy, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

52 A.D.2d 982, 383 N.Y.S.2d 122, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12861, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/alexander-v-kiviranna-nyappdiv-1976.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack