Walter Sedovic Architect, P.C., Plaintiff-Counterclaim-Defendant-Appellant v. John A. Alesandro, Defendants-Counterclaimants-Appellees

Second Circuit

Walter Sedovic Architect, P.C., Plaintiff-Counterclaim-Defendant-Appellant v. John A. Alesandro, Defendants-Counterclaimants-Appellees

237 F.3d 693, 2001 WL 40899

Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit·Decided January 16, 2001·No. 99-9463·Published

Opinion

Present KEARSE, JACOBS and CABRANES, Circuit Judges.

Counsel for certain defendants-counter-claimants-appellees having informed this Court in or about November 2000 that the above action has been settled,

And this Court having unsuccessfully requested the parties to file a stipulation of discontinuance of the appeal, which was scheduled to be heard on January 10, 2001,

And this Court having telephoned the office of Philip Furgang, Furgang & Ad-war (“Furgang”), counsel of record for plaintiff-counterclaim-defendant-appellant (“plaintiff’), and having eventually been informed by Furgang that the matter has been settled and that written confirmation would be forthcoming from Kevin J. O’Neill, Gogic, Byrne & O’Neill (“O’Neill”), another firm representing plaintiff,

And O’Neill, having sent this Court a letter dated January 5, 2001, stating that this appeal has been rendered moot because the matter has been settled, and attaching a copy of a stipulation of dismissal filed in the district court and so-ordered by that court on December 4, 2000,

It is hereby ordered that the appeal be and it hereby is dismissed with prejudice.

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

Present KEARSE, JACOBS and CABRANES, Circuit Judges.

Counsel for certain defendants-counter-claimants-appellees having informed this Court in or about November 2000 that the above action has been settled,

And this Court having unsuccessfully requested the parties to file a stipulation of discontinuance of the appeal, which was scheduled to be heard on January 10, 2001,

And this Court having telephoned the office of Philip Furgang, Furgang & Ad-war (“Furgang”), counsel of record for plaintiff-counterclaim-defendant-appellant (“plaintiff’), and having eventually been informed by Furgang that the matter has been settled and that written confirmation would be forthcoming from Kevin J. O’Neill, Gogic, Byrne & O’Neill (“O’Neill”), another firm representing plaintiff,

And O’Neill, having sent this Court a letter dated January 5, 2001, stating that this appeal has been rendered moot because the matter has been settled, and attaching a copy of a stipulation of dismissal filed in the district court and so-ordered by that court on December 4, 2000,

It is hereby ordered that the appeal be and it hereby is dismissed with prejudice.

Walter Sedovic Architect, P.C., Plaintiff-Counterclaim-Defendant-Appellant v. John A. Alesandro, Defendants-Counterclaimants-Appellees, 237 F.3d 693, 2001 WL 40899 (2d Cir. 2001).

Pincite

237 F.3d 693 (Walter Sedovic Architect, P.C., Plaintiff-Counterclaim-Defendant-Appellant v. John A. Alesandro, Defendants-Counterclaimants-Appellees) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related