LYNN PAIGE, V ROBERT PAIGE, . LYNN PAIGE, V ROBERT PAIGE, . (APPEAL NO. 2.) LYNN PAIGE V ROBERT PAIGE (APPEAL NO. 3.)
Motion No: CA 17-01587
Slip Opinion No: 2017 NY Slip Op 87481(U)
Decided on September 25, 2017
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.


September 25, 2017

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

DOCKET NO. CA 17-01587
DOCKET NO. CA 17-01588
DOCKET NO. CA 17-01589

LYNN PAIGE, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT-APPELLANT,

V

ROBERT PAIGE, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT-RESPONDENT.

(APPEAL NO. 1.)

LYNN PAIGE, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT-APPELLANT,

V

ROBERT PAIGE, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT-RESPONDENT.

(APPEAL NO. 2.)

LYNN PAIGE, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT,

V

ROBERT PAIGE, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

(APPEAL NO. 3.)


Defendant Robert Paige having moved to consolidate the appeals and for an extension of time to perfect the appeals taken herein from orders and a judgment of the Supreme Court entered in the Office of the Clerk of the County of Steuben on November 15, 2016 (appeal No. 1), January 19, 2017 (appeal No. 2), and February 15, 2017 (appeal No. 3),

Now, upon reading and filing the affidavit of Maurice J. Verrillo, Esq., sworn to September 7, 2017, and the notice of motion with proof of service thereof, 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 the appeals from the orders and the judgment entered November 15, 2016, January 19, 2017, and February 15, 2017, are hereby consolidated for the purposes of perfecting and arguing the appeals, and

It is further ORDERED that the motion insofar as it seeks an extension of time to perfect appeal Nos. 1 and 2 is granted, and appellant shall perfect the appeals on or before November 13, 2017, and, in the event of failure to so perfect, the appeals hereby dismissed without further order, and

It is further ORDERED that the motion insofar as it seeks an extension of time to perfect appeal No. 3 is dismissed as premature (see 22 NYCRR 1000.13 [f]).

Entered: September 25, 2017

Frances E. Cafarell, Clerk