Torres v. Smithkline Beecham Clinical Laboratories, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Torres v. Smithkline Beecham Clinical Laboratories, Inc.

265 A.D.2d 478, 696 N.Y.S.2d 859, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10415

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

DecidedOctober 18, 1999

StatusPublished

This text of 265 A.D.2d 478 (Torres v. Smithkline Beecham Clinical Laboratories, Inc.) 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

Torres v. Smithkline Beecham Clinical Laboratories, Inc., 265 A.D.2d 478, 696 N.Y.S.2d 859, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10415 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal by the plaintiffs from (1) an order of the Supreme Court, Orange County (Owen, J.), dated June 9, 1998, and (2) a judgment of the same court, dated June 22, 1998.

Ordered that the appeal from the order is dismissed; and it is further,

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, for reasons stated by Justice Owen at the Supreme Court in the order dated June 9, 1998; and it is further,

Ordered that the respondent is awarded one bill of costs.

The appeal from the intermediate order must be dismissed because the right of direct appeal therefrom terminated with the entry of judgment in the action (see, Matter of Aho, 39 NY2d 241, 248). The issues raised on appeal from the order are brought up for review and have been considered on the appeal from the judgment (see, CPLR 5501 [a] [1]). Joy, J. P., Friedmann, Schmidt and Smith, JJ., concur.

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