Neeman v. Smith
Opinion
| Neeman v Smith |
| 2024 NY Slip Op 02540 |
| Decided on May 8, 2024 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. |
| This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports. |
Decided on May 8, 2024 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
COLLEEN D. DUFFY, J.P.
PAUL WOOTEN
LARA J. GENOVESI
HELEN VOUTSINAS, JJ.
2020-09202
2021-06069
(Index No. 6289/13)
v
Rita Zelda Smith, etc., et al., defendants; Catania, Mahon & Rider, PLLC, nonparty-respondent.
Judd R. Spray, New York, NY, for appellants.
Catania, Mahon & Rider, PLLC, Newburgh, NY (Joseph G. McKay of counsel), nonparty-respondent pro se.
DECISION & ORDER
In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for trespass and for injunctive relief, the plaintiffs appeal from (1) an order of the Supreme Court, Orange County (Robert A. Onofry, J.), dated July 17, 2020, and (2) an order of the same court dated June 14, 2021. The order dated July 17, 2020, insofar as appealed from, granted those branches of the motion of nonparty Catania, Mahon & Rider, PLLC, which were for leave to withdraw as counsel for the plaintiffs, to impose a charging lien for legal services rendered to the plaintiffs, and, in effect, for an inquest to fix the amount of the charging lien, and granted that nonparty's application to impose a retaining lien on the plaintiffs' file. The order dated June 14, 2021, denied the plaintiffs' motion for leave to renew their opposition to those branches of the motion of nonparty Catania, Mahon & Rider, PLLC, which were for leave to withdraw as counsel for the plaintiffs and to impose a charging lien and that nonparty's application to impose a retaining lien on the plaintiffs' file.
ORDERED that the appeals are dismissed, without costs or disbursements.
The appeals must be dismissed because the portions of the order dated July 17, 2020, appealed from and the order dated June 14, 2021, were superseded by a judgment of the same court entered June 13, 2022 (see Christopulos v Christopulos, 209 AD3d 970). The issues raised on the appeals from the orders are brought up for review and have been considered on the related appeal from the judgment (see Neeman v Smith, ____ AD3d ____ [Appellate Division Docket No. 2022-05668; decided herewith]).
DUFFY, J.P., WOOTEN, GENOVESI and VOUTSINAS, JJ., concur.
ENTER:Darrell M. Joseph
Clerk of the Court
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
2024 NY Slip Op 02540 (Neeman v. Smith) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.