| 2814-2824 Emmons Acquisitions, LLC v Marina Rozenberg, Et Al., Tenants, & Grigory Epshteyn & Paradise Garden, LLC |
| Motion No: 2011-03101 KC |
| Slip Opinion No: 2014 NY Slip Op 64418(U) |
| Decided on February 6, 2014 |
| Appellate Term, 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. |
of the State of New York for the 2nd, 11th & 13th judicial Districts
MICHAEL L. PESCE, P.J.
THOMAS P. ALIOTTA
MARTIN M. SOLOMON, JJ.
DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION
| 2814-2824 Emmons Acquisitions, LLC, Respondent, v Marina Rozenberg, et al., Tenants, and Grigory Epshteyn and Paradise Garden, LLC, Appellants. |
Appeals from orders of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County, entered October 27, 2011, November 1, 2011 and November 18, 2011, respectively.
On the court's own motion, it is
ORDERED that the appeal from the order entered October 27, 2011 is dismissed on the ground that no appeal as of right lies from an order does not decide a motion made on notice (CCA 1702 [a] [2]), and leave to appeal has not been granted. CPLR 2211 provides that a "motion on notice is made when a notice of the motion or an order to show cause is served;" and it is further,
ORDERED that so much of the appeal as is from the portion of the order entered November 1, 2011 that granted respondent's motion to strike the answer is dismissed on the ground that the right of direct appeal from that portion of the order terminated with the entry of a final judgment on November 9, 2011 (see Matter of Aho, 39 NY2d 241, 248 [1976]). The issues raised on the appeal from that portion of the order may be brought up for review and considered on the appeal from the final judgment under appeal No. 2012-1243 K C (see CPLR 5501 [a] [1]); and it is further,
ORDERED that so much of the appeal as is from the portion of the order entered November 1, 2011 that denied appellants' motion for a written order regarding the court's direction that appellants pay interim use and occupancy is dismissed, as the appeal from that portion of the order was rendered moot by the entry of a final judgment; and it is further,
ORDERED that the appeal from the order entered November 18, 2011 is dismissed, as appellants are not aggrieved by that order (see CPLR 5511).
ENTER:
Paul Kenny
Chief Clerk