| Sweeney v Purcell Constr. Corp. |
| 2005 NY Slip Op 05633 [20 AD3d 945] |
| Decided on July 1, 2005 |
| Appellate Division, Fourth Department |
| Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. |
| This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports. |
Decided on July 1, 2005
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department
PRESENT: PIGOTT, JR., P.J., SCUDDER, GORSKI, MARTOCHE, AND LAWTON, JJ.
671 CA 04-01307
[*1]ZONA GALE B. SWEENEY, BERNARD B. SWEENEY, PENNY CUMMINGS, BARRY CUMMINGS, NORMAN J. JAREO AND FRANCIS R. JAREO, PLAINTIFFS-RESPONDENTS, ORDER
v
PURCELL CONSTRUCTION CORP., BY AND THROUGH ITS AGENTS, OFFICERS AND/OR EMPLOYEES, 514 WASHINGTON STREET PARTNERSHIP, BY AND THROUGH ITS AGENTS, OFFICERS AND/OR EMPLOYEES, ROBERT PYKE, M.D., PAUL KRUGER, M.D., SYLVIA REIMER, M.D., IVO MATIJEVIC, M.D., AND MARK S. PURCELL, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS AGENTS, OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES OF 514 WASHINGTON STREET PARTNERSHIP, DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS. (APPEAL NO. 2.)
Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Jefferson County (Hugh A. Gilbert, J.), entered April 29, 2004. The order denied defendants' motion to preclude certain evidence.
SUGARMAN LAW FIRM, LLP, SYRACUSE (MATTHEW D. GUMAER OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS.
CHERUNDOLO, BOTTAR & LEONE, P.C., SYRACUSE (JOHN C. CHERUNDOLO OF COUNSEL), AND COZEN O'CONNOR, NEW YORK, FOR PLAINTIFFS-RESPONDENTS.
It is hereby ORDERED that said appeal be and the same hereby is unanimously dismissed without costs as moot.
Entered: July 1, 2005
JoAnn M. Wahl
Clerk of the Court