| Snolis v Clare |
| Motion No: 2009-08905 |
| Slip Opinion No: 2010 NY Slip Op 77993(U) |
| Decided on July 27, 2010 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department, Motion Decision |
| Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. |
| This motion is uncorrected and is not subject to publication in the Official Reports. |
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M106141
E/ct
PETER B. SKELOS, J.P.
JOHN M. LEVENTHAL
CHERYL E. CHAMBERS
L. PRISCILLA HALL, JJ.
|
2009-08905, 2010-02773 Tara Snolis, et al., respondents-appellants, v Timothy W. Clare, etc., respondent, William J. Poisson, etc., et al., appellants- respondents. (Appeal No. 1) Tara Snolis, et al., appellants, v Timothy W. Clare, etc., defendant, William J. Poisson, etc., et al., respondents. (Appeal No. 2) (Index No. 4354-05)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Motion by Tara Snolis and Albert Snolis to enlarge the time to serve and file a brief on an appeal and cross appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, dated August 17, 2009 (Appellate Division Docket No. 2009-08905), and to consolidate that appeal and cross appeal with an appeal from an order of the same court dated February 1, 2010 (Appellate Division Docket No. 2010-02773).
Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and no papers having been filed in opposition or in relation thereto, it is
ORDERED that the branch of the motion which is to enlarge the time to serve and file a brief with respect to the order dated August 17, 2009 (Appellate Division Docket No. 2009-08905), is granted, the time of Tara Snolis and Albert Snolis to serve and file a brief is enlarged until August 27, 2010, and the brief, including the points of argument on the cross appeal (see 22 NYCRR 67.8[c][3]), must be served and filed on or before that date; and it is further,
ORDERED that no further enlargement of time shall be granted; and it is further,
ORDERED that the branch of the motion which is to consolidate the appeals and cross appeal is granted to the extent that Tara Snolis and Albert Snolis may perfect their appeal from the order dated February 1, 2010 (Appellate Division Docket No. 2010-02773), by filing a record that does not contain the papers contained in the record filed with respect to the order dated August 17, 2009 (Appellate Division Docket No. 2009-08905), and the parties may refer to the record filed with respect to the order dated August 17, 2009 (Appellate Division Docket No. 2009-08905), in the briefs filed with respect to the order dated February 1, 2010 (Appellate Division Docket No. 2010-02773), and that branch of the motion is otherwise denied.
SKELOS, J.P., LEVENTHAL, CHAMBERS and HALL, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court