Carter Ledyard & Milburn LLP, New York, NY (A. Jonathan Trafimow of counsel), for appellants Woodbury Medical Practice, P.C., and Elizabeth Sullivan, and William D. Wexler, North Babylon, NY, for appellant Tara Accavallo (one brief filed).

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for employment discrimination on the basis of, among other things, gender in violation of the New York State Human Rights Law and the New York City Human Rights Law, the defendants Woodbury Medical Practice, P.C., and Elizabeth Sullivan appeal, and the defendant Tara Accavallo separately appeals, from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Joseph J. Esposito, J.), entered December 9, 2022. The order denied the motion of the defendants Woodbury Medical Practice, P.C., and Elizabeth Sullivan, joined by the defendant Tara Accavallo, pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) to dismiss the amended complaint insofar as asserted against each of them.

Ordered that the appeals are dismissed as academic, without costs or disbursements.

In October 2021, the plaintiff commenced this action, inter alia, to recover damages for employment discrimination on the basis of, among other things, gender in violation of the New York State Human Rights Law and the New York City Human Rights Law. In January 2022, the plaintiff filed an amended complaint. Thereafter, the defendants Woodbury Medical Practice, P.C., and Elizabeth Sullivan moved pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) to dismiss the amended complaint insofar as asserted against them. The defendant Tara Accavallo joined the motion. In an order entered December 9, 2022, the Supreme Court denied the motion. Woodbury Medical Practice, P.C., and Sullivan appeal, and Accavallo separately appeals.

The amended complaint in this action was superseded by the second amended complaint (see Moscatelli v Woodbury Med. Practice, P.C., 241 AD3d 1453 [2025] [decided herewith]). Thus, the appeals from the order entered December 9, 2022, which determined the motion of Woodbury Medical Practice, P.C., and Sullivan, joined by Accavallo, pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) to dismiss the amended complaint insofar as asserted against each of them, have been rendered academic (see Chalasani v Neuman, 64 NY2d 879, 879 [1985]; Golia v Vieira, 162 AD3d 863, 864 [2018]). Miller, J.P., Ford, Dowling and McCormack, JJ., concur.