Marry v Newburgh Enlarged City School District
Motion No: 2022-04398
Slip Opinion No: 2025 NY Slip Op 63274(U)
Decided on February 24, 2025
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.


Supreme Court of the State of New York

Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department

M303102

AFA/

MARK C. DILLON, J.P.

DEBORAH A. DOWLING

BARRY E. WARHIT

LAURENCE L. LOVE, JJ.

2022-04398

Niall Marry, etc., et al., appellants,

v Newburgh Enlarged City School District,

respondent.

(Index No. 2526/2020)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Orange County, dated May 4, 2022. By decision and order on motion of this Court dated May 24, 2024, the appellants were directed to serve and file a replacement record that does not contain pages 93-131 and 139-212 and a replacement reply brief which annexes all unpublished decisions cited therein and the branch of the motion by the respondent which is to strike stated portions of the reply brief on the ground that they improperly raise arguments for the first time on appeal was held in abeyance and referred to the panel of Justices hearing the appeal for determination upon the argument or submission thereof. The appellants have not filed the replacement record or the replacement reply brief. By order to show cause dated September 18, 2024, the appellants were directed to show cause before this Court why the appeal should or should not be dismissed on the ground that they have failed to comply with this Court's order dated May 24, 2024.

Now, upon the order to show cause and the papers filed in response thereto, it is

ORDERED that the motion to dismiss the appeal is granted and the appeal is dismissed, without costs or disbursements; and it is further,

ORDERED that the branch of the motion which is to strike stated portions of the reply brief on the ground that they improperly raise arguments for the first time on appeal is denied as academic.

DILLON, J.P., DOWLING, WARHIT and LOVE, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

Darrell M. Joseph

Clerk of the Court