| Bertault v Jotas Corp. |
| Motion No: 2022-09864 |
| Slip Opinion No: 2023 NY Slip Op 69161(U) |
| Decided on June 23, 2023 |
| 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
M289668
AFA/
FRANCESCA E. CONNOLLY, J.P.
LARA J. GENOVESI
WILLIAM G. FORD
LILLIAN WAN, JJ.
|
2022-09864 Vincent Bertault, appellant, v Jotas Corp., respondent. (Index No. 601169/2022)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, dated December 1, 2022. Motion by the appellant, inter alia, to stay enforcement of the order, pending hearing and determination of the appeal. By order to show cause dated May 19, 2023, the parties were directed to show cause before this Court why an order should or should not be made and entered dismissing the appeal on the ground that the right of direct appeal from the order terminated upon entry in the above-entitled action of an order and judgment (one paper) of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, dated January 31, 2023 (see Matter of Aho, 39 NY2d 241), and the appellant's motion was held in abeyance in the interim. Motion by the respondent to dismiss the appeal on the ground that the right of direct appeal from the order terminated upon entry of the order and judgment. Application by the appellant to extend the time to perfect the appeal.
Now, upon the order to show cause and no papers having been filed in response thereto, upon the papers filed in support of the motion by the appellant and the papers filed in opposition thereto, upon the papers filed in support of the motion by the respondent and the papers filed in relation thereto, and upon the papers filed in support of the application and no papers having been filed in opposition or in relation thereto, it is
ORDERED that the motions to dismiss the appeal are granted, and the appeal is dismissed, without costs or disbursements (see Matter of Aho, 39 NY2d 241); and it is further,
ORDERED that the motion by the appellant and the application are denied as academic.
CONNOLLY, J.P., GENOVESI, FORD and WAN, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
Maria T. Fasulo
Clerk of the Court