Burnell v. Marine Midland Bank

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Burnell v. Marine Midland Bank

288 A.D.2d 784, 733 N.Y.S.2d 644, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11498

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

DecidedNovember 29, 2001

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 288 A.D.2d 784 (Burnell v. Marine Midland Bank) 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

Burnell v. Marine Midland Bank, 288 A.D.2d 784, 733 N.Y.S.2d 644, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11498 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

Mugglin, J.

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court (McGill, J.), entered August 28, 2000 in Clinton County, which denied plaintiffs’ motion to set aside the verdict.

An appeal from a final judgment will bring with it for review an appeal from an intermediate order which necessarily affects the judgment (see, CPLR 5501 [a] [1]). This Court has consistently recognized the corollary implicit in this rule, namely, that entry of a final judgment in the action terminates the right to take an appeal from an intermediate order (see, Dubray v Pratt, 283 AD2d 869; Norwest Mtge. v Clifford, 271 AD2d 721; Rivera v Majuk, 256 AD2d 910, 911; Pixel Inti. Network v State of New York, 255 AD2d 666). Accordingly, since the record on appeal reveals that final judgment was entered in this action on April 19, 2001, plaintiffs’ appeal from the intermediate order denying their motion to set aside the verdict must be dismissed.

Mercure, J. P., Spain, Carpinello and Rose, JJ., concur. Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, without costs.

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

Mugglin, J.

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court (McGill, J.), entered August 28, 2000 in Clinton County, which denied plaintiffs’ motion to set aside the verdict.

An appeal from a final judgment will bring with it for review an appeal from an intermediate order which necessarily affects the judgment (see, CPLR 5501 [a] [1]). This Court has consistently recognized the corollary implicit in this rule, namely, that entry of a final judgment in the action terminates the right to take an appeal from an intermediate order (see, Dubray v Pratt, 283 AD2d 869; Norwest Mtge. v Clifford, 271 AD2d 721; Rivera v Majuk, 256 AD2d 910, 911; Pixel Inti. Network v State of New York, 255 AD2d 666). Accordingly, since the record on appeal reveals that final judgment was entered in this action on April 19, 2001, plaintiffs’ appeal from the intermediate order denying their motion to set aside the verdict must be dismissed.

Mercure, J. P., Spain, Carpinello and Rose, JJ., concur. Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

288 A.D.2d 784, 733 N.Y.S.2d 644, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11498, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/burnell-v-marine-midland-bank-nyappdiv-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack