Summers v. Faust

110 A.D.2d 643, 487 N.Y.S.2d 380, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 48540
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided April 1, 1985·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

[644]*644An order directing a judicial hearing to aid in the disposition of a motion does not affect a substantial right (see, CPLR 5701 [a] [2] [v]), and is therefore not appealable as of right (see, Perez v Perez, 100 AD2d 962; Warner v Warner, 88 AD2d 639; Sklarin v Sklarin, 86 AD2d 606; Bagdy v Progresso Foods Corp., 86 AD2d 589). The issue of counsel fees is inextricably intertwined with the merits of that branch of the motion which was to dismiss the father’s petition (see, Domestic Relations Law § 75-h [7]; § 75-i [3]) and cannot be determined until after the hearing. The instant appeal is therefore dismissed. Any party aggrieved by the order entered subsequent to the hearing may take an appeal (Perez v Perez, supra; Sklarin v Sklarin, supra). Thompson, J. P., Bracken, O’Connor and Weinstein, JJ., concur.

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

Summers v. Faust, 110 A.D.2d 643, 487 N.Y.S.2d 380, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 48540 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1985).

110 A.D.2d 643 (Summers v. Faust) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Buhler v. Sheridan
134 A.D.2d 822 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1987)
Robinson v. Robinson
126 A.D.2d 883 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1987)