Anagnos v. Hangac

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Anagnos v. Hangac

239 A.D.2d 533, 658 N.Y.S.2d 87, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5670

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

DecidedMay 27, 1997

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 239 A.D.2d 533 (Anagnos v. Hangac) 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

Anagnos v. Hangac, 239 A.D.2d 533, 658 N.Y.S.2d 87, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5670 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action, inter alia, for a declaration that the plaintiffs are entitled to an easement across the defendants’ property, the defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Dutchess County (Bernhard, J.), entered June 13, 1996, which denied their motion to compel the plaintiff William H. Anagnos to answer questions propounded at an examination before trial.

Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, with costs to the respondents.

Rulings made upon objections to questions posed in the course of an examination before trial are not appealable as of right, even if incorporated into a formal order (Ewell v Moore, 133 AD2d 67; Rockwood Natl. Corp. v Peat, Marwick, Mitchell & Co., 59 AD2d 573; see also, Feeley v Midas Props., 168 AD2d 416, 417-418; Marks v Top Job Sanitation Co., 145 AD2d 416; Crow-Crimmins-Wolff & Munier v County of Westchester, 126 AD2d 696). Moreover, this Court has held "on numerous occasions .that 'we are disinclined to grant leave to parties who have taken it upon themselves to perfect an appeal without leave to appeal’ ” (Ewell v Moore, supra, at 67, quoting Roberts v Modica, 102 AD2d 886; Rockwood Natl. Corp. v Peat, Mar-wick, Mitchell & Co., supra, at 574). Accordingly, the instant appeal is dismissed. Copertino, J. P., Thompson, Sullivan and Friedmann, JJ., concur.

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

In an action, inter alia, for a declaration that the plaintiffs are entitled to an easement across the defendants’ property, the defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Dutchess County (Bernhard, J.), entered June 13, 1996, which denied their motion to compel the plaintiff William H. Anagnos to answer questions propounded at an examination before trial.

Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, with costs to the respondents.

Rulings made upon objections to questions posed in the course of an examination before trial are not appealable as of right, even if incorporated into a formal order (Ewell v Moore, 133 AD2d 67; Rockwood Natl. Corp. v Peat, Marwick, Mitchell & Co., 59 AD2d 573; see also, Feeley v Midas Props., 168 AD2d 416, 417-418; Marks v Top Job Sanitation Co., 145 AD2d 416; Crow-Crimmins-Wolff & Munier v County of Westchester, 126 AD2d 696). Moreover, this Court has held "on numerous occasions .that 'we are disinclined to grant leave to parties who have taken it upon themselves to perfect an appeal without leave to appeal’ ” (Ewell v Moore, supra, at 67, quoting Roberts v Modica, 102 AD2d 886; Rockwood Natl. Corp. v Peat, Mar-wick, Mitchell & Co., supra, at 574). Accordingly, the instant appeal is dismissed. Copertino, J. P., Thompson, Sullivan and Friedmann, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

239 A.D.2d 533, 658 N.Y.S.2d 87, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5670, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/anagnos-v-hangac-nyappdiv-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack