| GLENN FEDERMAN V TOWN OF LORRAINE, HIGHWAY SUPERINTENDENT JOSEPH WASILEWSKI, TOWN ATTORNEY DAVID GEURTSEN, ESQ., SOUTH |
| Motion No: CA 25-00092 |
| Slip Opinion No: 2025 NY Slip Op 74479(U) |
| Decided on August 13, 2025 |
| Appellate Division, Fourth 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. |
PRESENT: WHALEN, P.J., BANNISTER, DELCONTE, KEANE, AND HANNAH, JJ.
CA 25-00092
CA 25-00310, CA 25-00317, CA 25-01150 AND CA 25-01161
CA 25-01171
| GLENN FEDERMAN, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, V TOWN OF LORRAINE,
HIGHWAY SUPERINTENDENT JOSEPH WASILEWSKI, TOWN ATTORNEY DAVID GEURTSEN, ESQ., SOUTH JEFFERSON CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICT, BOARD OF
EDUCATION, SCHOOL SUPERINTENDENT SCOTT SLATER, TRANSPORTATION ADMINISTRATOR MS. REBECCA DALRYMPLE, ERIC J. SOULES, STEVEN J.
OVERTON, AND STEVEN EASTMAN, DEFENDANTS-RESPONDENTS. GLENN FEDERMAN, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, V TOWN OF LORRAINE,
HIGHWAY SUPERINTENDENT JOSEPH WASILEWSKI, DEPUTY HIGHWAY SUPERINTENDENT HAROLD DOWNEY, TOWN SUPERVISOR VINCE MOORE, TOWN
COUNCIL MEMBERS DAVID JOHNSON, JOE HODGES, LESTER HOBBS, GORDON HUTTON, DEVIN M. FILSON, TIM TRYON, MICHAEL DOBBINS AND DAMIAN
SMITH, DEFENDANTS-RESPONDENTS. GLENN FEDERMAN, CLAIMANT-APPELLANT, V STATE OF NEW YORK,
DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT. |
Appellant having moved to consolidate the appeals taken herein from orders of the Supreme Court, Jefferson County, dated December 11, 2024 (appeal No. 1, CA 25-00092), October 24, 2024 (appeal No. 2, CA 25-00310), February 19, 2025 (appeal No. 3, CA 25-00317), June 26, 2025 (appeal No. 4, CA 25-01150; appeal No. 5, CA 25-01161) and the appeal taken herein from an order of the Court of Claims, dated February 25, 2025 (appeal No. 6, CA 25-01171), and for other relief,
Now, upon reading and filing the papers with respect to the motion, and due deliberation having been had thereon,
It is hereby ORDERED that the motion insofar as it seeks consolidation of the previously consolidated appeal Nos. 1-3 with appeal Nos. 4-6 is denied (see 22 NYCRR 1250.9 [f] [4]), and
It is further ORDERED that the motion insofar as it seeks extensions of time to perfect
appeal Nos. 1-3 is dismissed as premature, and
It is further ORDERED that the motion insofar as it seeks authorization to supplement the record is denied without prejudice to a motion seeking such relief in Supreme Court and any appeal from the order deciding the motion, if necessary (see Matter of Stewart v Soda, 239 AD2d 966, 966 [4th Dept 1997]; 22 NYCRR 1250.7 [g]; 1000.7[b]; see also Meyer v Doyle Chevrolet, 234 AD2d 1016, 1016 [4th Dept 1996]), and
It is further ORDERED that the motion is denied insofar as it seeks other relief.
Entered: August 13, 2025
Ann Dillon Flynn
Clerk of the Court