From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Borrok v. Town of Southampton

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Jul 29, 2015
130 A.D.3d 1023 (N.Y. App. Div. 2015)

Opinion

07-29-2015

In the Matter of Andrew BORROK, appellant, v. TOWN OF SOUTHAMPTON, et al., respondents.

Mischel & Horn, P.C., New York, N.Y. (Scott T. Horn and Naomi M. Taub of counsel), for appellant. Farrell Fritz, P.C., Watermill, N.Y. (David J. Gilmartin, Jr., and Ryan Sirianni of counsel), for respondent 34 Cove, LLC.


Mischel & Horn, P.C., New York, N.Y. (Scott T. Horn and Naomi M. Taub of counsel), for appellant.

Farrell Fritz, P.C., Watermill, N.Y. (David J. Gilmartin, Jr., and Ryan Sirianni of counsel), for respondent 34 Cove, LLC.

Opinion In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Southampton dated April 3, 2014, which, after a hearing, granted the application of 34 Cove, LLC, for certain area variances, the petitioner appeals, by permission, from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Garguilo, J.), dated May 19, 2014, which, inter alia, denied his motion for a preliminary injunction.

ORDERED that the appeal is dismissed, without costs or disbursements.

The appeal from the intermediate order in this proceeding must be dismissed because the right of direct appeal therefrom terminated with the entry of a judgment dated November 10, 2014 (see Matter of Aho, 39 N.Y.2d 241, 248, 383 N.Y.S.2d 285, 347 N.E.2d 647 ). The issues raised on appeal from the order are not brought up for review and have not been considered on the appeal from the judgment (see Matter of Borrok v. Town of Southampton, 130 A.D.3d 1024, 14 N.Y.S.3d 471, 2015 WL 4546703 [Appellate Division Docket No. 2014–11038; decided herewith]; Strnad v. Brudnicki, 200 A.D.2d 735, 606 N.Y.S.2d 913, 915 ), as the order does not “necessarily affect” the final judgment (CPLR 5501[a][1] ; see Strnad v. Brudnicki, 200 A.D.2d 735, 606 N.Y.S.2d 913, 915 ).

MASTRO, J.P., COHEN, MALTESE and BARROS, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Borrok v. Town of Southampton

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Jul 29, 2015
130 A.D.3d 1023 (N.Y. App. Div. 2015)
Case details for

Borrok v. Town of Southampton

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of Andrew BORROK, appellant, v. TOWN OF SOUTHAMPTON, et al.…

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.

Date published: Jul 29, 2015

Citations

130 A.D.3d 1023 (N.Y. App. Div. 2015)
2015 N.Y. Slip Op. 6339
13 N.Y.S.3d 846