Faicco v. Mr. Lucky's Pub, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Faicco v. Mr. Lucky's Pub, Inc.

131 A.D.3d 920, 15 N.Y.S.3d 893

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

DecidedSeptember 2, 2015

Docket2013-01775

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 131 A.D.3d 920 (Faicco v. Mr. Lucky's Pub, Inc.) 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

Faicco v. Mr. Lucky's Pub, Inc., 131 A.D.3d 920, 15 N.Y.S.3d 893 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2015).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals, as limited by her brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Martin, J.), entered December 12, 2012, as granted that branch of the motion of the third-party defendant which was, in effect, for summary judgment declaring that the third-party defendant is not obligated to defend or indemnify the defendant in the main action.

Motion by the third-party defendant to dismiss the appeal by the plaintiff from the order, on the ground that the plaintiff is not aggrieved by the order appealed from. By decision and order on motion of this Court dated March 31, 2014, the motion was held in abeyance and referred to the panel of Justices hearing the appeal for determination upon the argument or submission thereof.

Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in opposition thereto, and upon the argument of the appeal, it is,

Ordered that the motion is granted; and it is further,

Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, with costs.

“A person is aggrieved within the meaning of CPLR 5511 ‘when he or she asks for relief but that relief is denied in whole or in part,’ or, when someone ‘asks for relief against him or her, which the person opposes, and the relief is granted in whole or in part’ ” (Matter of Michael O.F. [Fausat O.], 101 AD3d 1121, 1122 [2012], quoting Mixon v TBV, Inc., 76 AD3d 144, 156-157 [2010]; see CPLR 5511; Harris v Pitts, 109 AD3d 790 [2013]). Here, the order appealed from granted relief to the third-party defendant, Penn-Star Insurance Company, against the defendants/third-party plaintiffs, Mr. Lucky’s Pub, Inc., doing business as Mr. Lucky’s Pub, and Cheryle Kijik, but not against the plaintiff (see generally River View at Patchogue, LLC v Hudson Ins. Co., 122 AD3d 824 [2014]). Since the plaintiff is not aggrieved by the order appealed from, her appeal must be dismissed (see Ahrorgulova v Mann, 108 AD3d 581, 582 [2013]; Upshur v Staten Is. Med. Group, 88 AD3d 785, 785 [2011]).

Rivera, J.P., Balkin, Miller and LaSalle, JJ., concur.

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

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals, as limited by her brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Martin, J.), entered December 12, 2012, as granted that branch of the motion of the third-party defendant which was, in effect, for summary judgment declaring that the third-party defendant is not obligated to defend or indemnify the defendant in the main action.

Motion by the third-party defendant to dismiss the appeal by the plaintiff from the order, on the ground that the plaintiff is not aggrieved by the order appealed from. By decision and order on motion of this Court dated March 31, 2014, the motion was held in abeyance and referred to the panel of Justices hearing the appeal for determination upon the argument or submission thereof.

Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in opposition thereto, and upon the argument of the appeal, it is,

Ordered that the motion is granted; and it is further,

Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, with costs.

“A person is aggrieved within the meaning of CPLR 5511 ‘when he or she asks for relief but that relief is denied in whole or in part,’ or, when someone ‘asks for relief against him or her, which the person opposes, and the relief is granted in whole or in part’ ” (Matter of Michael O.F. [Fausat O.], 101 AD3d 1121, 1122 [2012], quoting Mixon v TBV, Inc., 76 AD3d 144, 156-157 [2010]; see CPLR 5511; Harris v Pitts, 109 AD3d 790 [2013]). Here, the order appealed from granted relief to the third-party defendant, Penn-Star Insurance Company, against the defendants/third-party plaintiffs, Mr. Lucky’s Pub, Inc., doing business as Mr. Lucky’s Pub, and Cheryle Kijik, but not against the plaintiff (see generally River View at Patchogue, LLC v Hudson Ins. Co., 122 AD3d 824 [2014]). Since the plaintiff is not aggrieved by the order appealed from, her appeal must be dismissed (see Ahrorgulova v Mann, 108 AD3d 581, 582 [2013]; Upshur v Staten Is. Med. Group, 88 AD3d 785, 785 [2011]).

Rivera, J.P., Balkin, Miller and LaSalle, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

131 A.D.3d 920, 15 N.Y.S.3d 893, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/faicco-v-mr-luckys-pub-inc-nyappdiv-2015.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack