| ROSE SLAZYK AND FRANK N. SLAZYK V JOYCE DAVOLI ROSE SLAZYK AND FRANK N. SLAZYK V JOYCE DAVOLI (APPEAL NO. 2.) ROSE |
| Motion No: CA 12-01590 |
| Slip Opinion No: 2012 NY Slip Op 84879(U) |
| Decided on September 14, 2012 |
| Appellate Division, Fourth 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. |
PRESENT: SCUDDER, P. J., SMITH, CENTRA, FAHEY, AND PERADOTTO, JJ.
DOCKET NO. CA 12-01590
DOCKET NO. CA 12-01591
DOCKET NO. CA 12-01660
| ROSE SLAZYK AND FRANK N. SLAZYK,
PLAINTIFFS-APPELLANTS, V JOYCE DAVOLI, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT. (APPEAL NO. 1.) ROSE SLAZYK AND FRANK N.
SLAZYK, PLAINTIFFS-APPELLANTS, V JOYCE DAVOLI, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT. (APPEAL NO. 2.) ROSE SLAZYK AND
FRANK N. SLAZYK, PLAINTIFFS-APPELLANTS, V JOYCE DAVOLI, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT. (APPEAL NO.
3.) |
Respondent having moved to dismiss the appeals taken herein from orders of the Supreme Court entered in the Office of the Clerk of the County of Erie on April 23, 2012 (appeal No. 1), and June 13, 2012 (appeal No. 2), on the ground that appellants have failed to perfect timely the appeals, and
Appellants having cross-moved to consolidate the appeals taken from the orders entered April 23, 2012, and June 13, 2012, and an appeal taken herein from an order of the Supreme Court entered in the Office of the Clerk of County of Erie on February 24, 2012 (appeal No. 3), having moved to extend the time to perfect the appeals, and having moved for other relief,
Now, upon reading and filing the affirmation of David M. Roach, Esq., dated August 27, 2012, the affirmation of Peter B. Nicely, Esq., dated September 6, 2012, and the notices of motion and cross motion with proof of service thereof, and due deliberation having been had thereon,
It is hereby ORDERED that respondent's motion insofar as it seeks to dismiss appeal No. 1 is granted and appeal No. 1 is dismissed without further order unless the appeal is perfected on or before November 13, 2012, and
It is further ORDERED that respondent's motion insofar as it seeks to dismiss appeal No. 2 is dismissed as untimely, and
It is further ORDERED that appellants' cross motion insofar as it seeks to consolidate the appeals, is granted and the appeals from the orders entered April 23, 2012, June 13, 2012, and February 24, 2012, are hereby consolidated for the purposes of perfecting and arguing the appeals, and
It is further ORDERED that appellants' cross motion is otherwise dismissed as unnecessary.
Entered: September 14, 2012
Frances E. Cafarell, Clerk