| Hofstra University v Nassau County, New York |
| Motion No: 2016-08869 |
| Slip Opinion No: 2016 NY Slip Op 87858(U) |
| Decided on October 7, 2016 |
| 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
M219402
E/sl
MARK C. DILLON, J.P.
SYLVIA O. HINDS-RADIX
JOSEPH J. MALTESE
BETSY BARROS, JJ.
|
2016 08869 Hofstra University, respondent, v Nassau County, New York, defendant. (Matter No. 1) St. Francis Hospital, Roslyn, New York, et al., respondents, v Nassau County, New York, et al., appellants. (Matter No. 2) In the Matter of Board of Education of East Meadow Union Free School District, et al., respondents, v Nassau County, New York, et al., appellants. (Matter No. 3) Baldwin Union Free School District, et al., respondents, v Nassau County, New York, et al., appellants. (Matter No. 4) (Index Nos. 3335/11, 3203/11, 3075/11, 3069/11)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Motion by Nassau County, New York, and Nassau County Treasurer, inter alia, for leave to appeal to this Court from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, entered May 23, 2016, to direct the respondents in Matter Nos. 1 and 2 as well as the respondent in Matter No. 3 National Center for Disability Services, Inc., to post an undertaking in the sum of $48 million and to fix the liability of the respondents in Matter No. 3 Board of Education of East Meadow Union Free School District and Board of Education of Westbury Union Free School District as well as the respondents in Matter No. 4 in the sum of $48 million, or to modify a certain preliminary injunction to permit the imposition of sewer charges, interest, and penalties, or to stay all proceedings in the above-entitled matters pending hearing and determination of the appeal.
Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in opposition thereto, it is
ORDERED that the branch of the motion which is for leave to appeal from so much of the order as directed a hearing is denied, and on the Court's own motion the appeal purportedly taken as of right from that portion of the order entered May 23, 2016, is dismissed, without costs or disbursements (see Bagdy v Progresso Foods Corp., 86 AD2d 589; and it is further,
ORDERED that the branch of the motion which is for leave to appeal from the remainder of the order is denied as unnecessary (see CPLR 5701); and it is further,
ORDERED that the motion is otherwise denied.
DILLON, J.P., HINDS-RADIX, MALTESE and BARROS, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
Aprilanne Agostino
Clerk of the Court