Higgins v. Whitmore

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Higgins v. Whitmore

270 A.D.2d 72, 706 N.Y.S.2d 304, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2586

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

DecidedMarch 9, 2000

StatusPublished

This text of 270 A.D.2d 72 (Higgins v. Whitmore) 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

Higgins v. Whitmore, 270 A.D.2d 72, 706 N.Y.S.2d 304, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2586 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal from order, Supreme Court, New York County (Barry Cozier, J.), entered March 31, 1999, which, sua sponte, amended the order entered October 8, 1998 so as to reduce the principal amount of the judgment to be entered against defendants Whit-more and Swift, unanimously dismissed, without costs, as moot.

Defendant Whitmore is the only appellant. By order dated August 11, 1999, the order on appeal was amended so as to provide for the entry of judgment against defendant Swift only. Thus, Whitmore is no longer aggrieved by the order on appeal, and his appeal is dismissed as moot. Insofar as Whitmore seeks to dismiss the action in its entirety, he should seek such relief in the motion court. Concur — Williams, J. P., Tom, Rubin and Andrias, JJ.

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

—Appeal from order, Supreme Court, New York County (Barry Cozier, J.), entered March 31, 1999, which, sua sponte, amended the order entered October 8, 1998 so as to reduce the principal amount of the judgment to be entered against defendants Whit-more and Swift, unanimously dismissed, without costs, as moot.

Defendant Whitmore is the only appellant. By order dated August 11, 1999, the order on appeal was amended so as to provide for the entry of judgment against defendant Swift only. Thus, Whitmore is no longer aggrieved by the order on appeal, and his appeal is dismissed as moot. Insofar as Whitmore seeks to dismiss the action in its entirety, he should seek such relief in the motion court. Concur — Williams, J. P., Tom, Rubin and Andrias, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

270 A.D.2d 72, 706 N.Y.S.2d 304, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2586, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/higgins-v-whitmore-nyappdiv-2000.