Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department

M276374

J/mb

WILLIAM F. MASTRO, A.P.J.

SYLVIA O. HINDS-RADIX

ROBERT J. MILLER

PAUL WOOTEN, JJ.

2018-03691 E'Lona Carter, plaintiff-respondent, v BMC-HOJO, Inc., etc., et al., defendants third-party plaintiffs-appellants; Tevin Williams, third-party defendant-respondent. (Index No. 1412/2014)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

2021-00507

E'Lona Carter, plaintiff-respondent,

v BMC-HOJO, Inc., etc., et al., defendants

third-party plaintiffs-appellants; Tevin

Williams, third-party defendant-respondent.

(Index No. 1412/2014)

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Orange County, entered January 18, 2018, which was determined by decision and order of this Court dated November 4, 2020, and an appeal from an amended judgment of the Supreme Court, Orange County, entered November 24, 2020. Motion by the defendants third-party plaintiffs-appellants for leave to reargue the appeal from the judgment, or, in the alternative, for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals from the decision and order of this Court. Motion by the plaintiff-respondent, inter alia, in effect, to dismiss the appeal from the amended judgment on the ground that the issues to be raised on that appeal are barred by the doctrine of law of the case. Motion by the defendants third-party plaintiffs-appellants to stay the trial on the issue of damages, pending determination of the motion, inter alia, for leave to reargue the appeal from the judgment, or of any motion to be filed in the Court of Appeals for leave to appeal to that court.

Upon the papers filed in support of the motions and the papers filed in opposition thereto, it is

ORDERED that the motions by the defendants third-party plaintiffs-appellants are denied, with $100 costs; and it is further,

ORDERED that the branch of the plaintiff-respondent's motion which is to dismiss the appeal from the amended judgment is granted, and the appeal from the amended judgment is dismissed, without costs or disbursements, on the ground that the issues to be raised on that appeal are barred by the doctrine of law of the case in light of this Court's decision and order dated November 4, 2020 (see McDonald v Savo, 161 AD3d 847); and it is further,

ORDERED that the plaintiff-respondent's motion is otherwise denied.

MASTRO, A.P.J., HINDS-RADIX, MILLER, and WOOTEN, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

Aprilanne Agostino

Clerk of the Court