of N.Y. Estate of Celia Kates v. Pressly

132 A.D.3d 723, 17 N.Y.S.3d 662
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedOctober 14, 2015
Docket2013-07397ON MOTION
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 132 A.D.3d 723 (of N.Y. Estate of Celia Kates v. Pressly) 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
of N.Y. Estate of Celia Kates v. Pressly, 132 A.D.3d 723, 17 N.Y.S.3d 662 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2015).

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for a violation of Judiciary Law § 487, the plaintiffs appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Diamond, J.), dated June 7, 2013, as denied their second motion, in effect, for leave to reargue their prior motion for the entry of a default judgment against the defendants, which was denied in an order of the same court dated August 23, 2010.

Cross motion by the defendants, inter alia, to dismiss the appeal on the ground that no appeal lies from an order denying reargument. By decision and order on motion of this Court dated June 24, 2014, that branch of the cross motion which is to dismiss the appeal was held in abeyance and referred to the Justices hearing the appeal for determination upon the argument or submission thereof, and the cross motion was otherwise denied.

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

Ordered that the branch of the cross motion which is to dismiss the appeal is granted; and it is further,

Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, with costs.

The appeal must be dismissed, as no appeal lies from an order denying reargument (see Emigrant Mtge. Co., Inc. v Thevenin, 127 AD3d 919 [2015]; Basile v Wiggs, 117 AD3d 766, 766 [2014]; Naso v Naso, 102 AD3d 755, 756 [2013]; Rosenfeld v Baker, 78 AD3d 810, 811 [2010]; Peralta v All Weather Tire Sales & Serv., Inc., 58 AD3d 823, 823 [2009]).

Rivera, J.P., Roman, LaSalle and Barros, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Einheber v. Sagalovich
140 A.D.3d 693 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2016)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
132 A.D.3d 723, 17 N.Y.S.3d 662, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/of-ny-estate-of-celia-kates-v-pressly-nyappdiv-2015.