Opinion
By order dated April 14, 1994, Nos. 17792, 17854 and 17899 were consolidated under No. 17792. By further order dated July 21, 1994, Nos. 17792 and 18104 were consolidated under No. 18104 for briefing and disposition.
April 20, 2000.
MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION, (CIV. NOS. 90-0252(1) and 91-0003(3)).
On the briefs:
James T. Paul and William M. McKeon, of Paul, Johnson, Park Niles, and Robert S. Chapman, of Greenberg, Glusker, Fields, Claman Machtinger, for appellants/cross-appellees.
Clog Holdings, N.V., Glenbrook Securities Corporation S.A. and George Harrison Hillary A.K.L. Parker for Amicus Curiae.
MOON, C.J., LEVINSON, NAKAYAMA, AND RAMIL, JJ., AND CIRCUIT JUDGE DEL ROSARIO, ASSIGNED BY REASON OF VACANCY.
Upon consideration of the motion for reconsideration in the matter of Clog v. Bailey, NO. 18104 (CIV. NOS. 90-0252(1) and 91-0003(3)), the papers in support, and the records and files herein, it appears that: (1) Appellants (Clog Holdings, N.V., Glenbrook Securities Corp. and George Harrison) are appealing from an order granting summary judgment in favor of Appellees (Scott Howard Whitney, Steven Philip Gold, Snapper Cay Acquisition, Inc., Donna Ann Barnett, Ralph H. Waite, and Beverly H. Waite); (2) the facts in this case show that there are genuine issues of material fact on all issues and the matter could not be decided on summary judgment. Therefore,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the motion for reconsideration is granted and this case is remanded to the Circuit Court of the Second Circuit for further proceedings.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that: (1) the November 22, 1993 findings of fact, conclusions of law, and order declaring Parcel 49 to be burdened by a pedestrian easement; (2) the January 10, 1994 order denying Barnett's and the Waite's motion to require the Clog Parties to construct and maintain all portions of the easement; (3) and the February 3, 1994 order designating the easement to be perpetual and non-exclusive in favor of the interests of Parcels 12 and 48 are vacated.
IT IS FINALLY ORDERED that: (1) the October 18, 1999 and February 1, 2000 opinions are depublished; (2) the clerk of the court shall promptly notify the applicable publishing companies and shall take all other appropriate steps to ensure that the opinions are depublished; and (3) the May 27, 1994 stay order is vacated as unnecessary because the judgments upon which it was based are vacated.