PRESENT: SCUDDER, P.J., SMITH, CENTRA, CARNI, AND WHALEN, JJ.

DOCKET NO. CA 12-01831
DOCKET NO. CA 12-01832
DOCKET NO. CA 12-01833

JEAN JOHNSON, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS PARENT AND NATURAL GUARDIAN OF MICHAEL STACHEWICZ, III, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, V JOHN G. MANNA, ROBERTA S. MANNA, TERRANCE KUCZKA AND ELIZABETH KUCZKA, DEFENDANTS-RESPONDENTS. (APPEAL NO. 1.) PRESENT: SCUDDER, P.J., SMITH, CENTRA, CARNI, AND WHALEN, JJ. JEAN JOHNSON, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS PARENT AND NATURAL GUARDIAN OF MICHAEL STACHEWICZ, III, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, V JOHN G. MANNA, ROBERTA S. MANNA, TERRANCE KUCZKA AND ELIZABETH KUCZKA, DEFENDANTS-RESPONDENTS. (APPEAL NO. 2.) PRESENT: SCUDDER, P.J., SMITH, CENTRA, CARNI, AND WHALEN, JJ. JEAN JOHNSON, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS PARENT AND NATURAL GUARDIAN OF MICHAEL STACHEWICZ, III, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, V JOHN G. MANNA, ROBERTA S. MANNA, TERRANCE KUCZKA AND ELIZABETH KUCZKA, DEFENDANTS-RESPONDENTS. (APPEAL NO. 3.)

Appeals having been taken herein from orders of the Supreme Court entered in the Office of the Clerk of the County of Niagara on December 9, 2011, August 7, 2012, and September 12, 2012, and appellant having moved to consolidate the appeals, for an extension of time to perfect and for a stay of discovery pending the hearing and determination of the appeals, and respondents having cross-moved to dismiss appeal No. 1, and for other relief,

Now, upon reading and filing the affidavit of Eugene C. Tenney, Esq., sworn to September 28, 2012, the notice of motion with proof of service thereof, the affidavit of Kenneth A. Patricia, Esq., sworn to October 18, 2012, the notice of cross-motion with proof of service thereof, and the affidavit of Boyd L. Earl, Esq., sworn to October 19, 2012, and due deliberation having been had thereon,

It is hereby ORDERED that the motion insofar as it seeks to consolidate the appeals is granted, and

It is further ORDERED that the motion insofar as it seeks an extension of time to perfect appeal No. 1 is granted and appellant shall perfect the appeal on or before January 7, 2013, and, in the event of failure to so perfect, the appeal is hereby dismissed without further order, and

It is further ORDERED that the motion insofar as it seeks an extension of time perfect appeal Nos. 2 and 3 is dismissed as premature (see 22 NYCRR 1000.13 [f]), and

It is further ORDERED that the motion insofar as it seeks a stay of discovery is denied, and

It is further ORDERED that the cross-motion is denied.

Entered: October 22, 2012

FRANCES E. CAFARELL, Clerk