Jackson v. Hollie

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Jackson v. Hollie

254 A.D.2d 333, 679 N.Y.S.2d 826, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10767

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

DecidedOctober 13, 1998

StatusPublished

This text of 254 A.D.2d 333 (Jackson v. Hollie) 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

Jackson v. Hollie, 254 A.D.2d 333, 679 N.Y.S.2d 826, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10767 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action, inter alia, to enjoin the defendant Rochdale Village, Inc., from enforcing a resolution against the respondent, and to recover damages for defamation, the defendants appeal, as limited by their brief, from, so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Golia, J.), dated August 4, 1997, as (1) denied their cross motion “to dismiss the plaintiffs order to show cause”, and (2) continued the temporary restraining order contained in the respondent’s order to show cause dated February 18, 1997.

Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, without costs or disbursements.

That branch of the order which denied the defendants’ cross motion to dismiss the plaintiffs order to show cause did not affect a substantial right within the meaning of CPLR 5701 (a) (2) (v), and therefore is not appealable as of right. Further, the order did not decide any motion with respect to the temporary restraining order contained in the order to show cause. Accordingly, that branch of the order which continued the temporary restraining order is also not appealable as of right (see, CPLR 5701 [a] [2]). Under the circumstances, we decline to grant permission to appeal (see, Aievoli v Aievoli, 249 AD2d 253; Sherwood v Roper, 237 AD2d 275). 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, to enjoin the defendant Rochdale Village, Inc., from enforcing a resolution against the respondent, and to recover damages for defamation, the defendants appeal, as limited by their brief, from, so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Golia, J.), dated August 4, 1997, as (1) denied their cross motion “to dismiss the plaintiffs order to show cause”, and (2) continued the temporary restraining order contained in the respondent’s order to show cause dated February 18, 1997.

Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, without costs or disbursements.

That branch of the order which denied the defendants’ cross motion to dismiss the plaintiffs order to show cause did not affect a substantial right within the meaning of CPLR 5701 (a) (2) (v), and therefore is not appealable as of right. Further, the order did not decide any motion with respect to the temporary restraining order contained in the order to show cause. Accordingly, that branch of the order which continued the temporary restraining order is also not appealable as of right (see, CPLR 5701 [a] [2]). Under the circumstances, we decline to grant permission to appeal (see, Aievoli v Aievoli, 249 AD2d 253; Sherwood v Roper, 237 AD2d 275). Copertino, J. P., Thompson, Sullivan and Friedmann, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

254 A.D.2d 333, 679 N.Y.S.2d 826, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10767, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jackson-v-hollie-nyappdiv-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack