Opinion
04-05-2017
CASTLE RESTORATION & CONSTRUCTION, INC., et al., respondents, v. CASTLE RESTORATION, LLC, et al., appellants.
Abrams, Fensterman, Fensterman, Eisman, Formato, Ferrara & Wolf, LLP, Lake Success, NY (Matthew F. Didora and Alex Leibson of counsel), for appellants. Forchelli, Curto, Deegan, Schwartz, Mineo & Terrana, LLP, Uniondale, NY (David A. Loglisci of counsel), for respondents.
Abrams, Fensterman, Fensterman, Eisman, Formato, Ferrara & Wolf, LLP, Lake Success, NY (Matthew F. Didora and Alex Leibson of counsel), for appellants.
Forchelli, Curto, Deegan, Schwartz, Mineo & Terrana, LLP, Uniondale, NY (David A. Loglisci of counsel), for respondents.
In an action to recover on a promissory note, commenced by motion for summary judgment in lieu of complaint pursuant to CPLR 3213, the defendants appeal from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Bucaria, J.), entered February 9, 2015, as denied that branch of their motion which was for leave to renew their opposition to the plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment in lieu of complaint pursuant to CPLR 3213.
Motion by the plaintiffs, inter alia, to dismiss the appeal on the ground that the right of direct appeal from the order terminated upon the entry of the final judgment in the action on May 29, 2015. By decision and order on motion of this Court dated December 9, 2015, that branch of the motion was referred to the panel of Justices hearing the appeal for determination upon the argument or submission thereof.
Upon the papers filed in support of the motion, the papers filed in opposition thereto, and the argument of the appeal, it is
ORDERED that the branch of the motion which is to dismiss the appeal on the ground that the right of direct appeal from the order terminated upon the entry of the final judgment in the action on May 29, 2015, is granted and the appeal is dismissed, with costs, as the right of direct appeal from the order terminated with the entry of the judgment (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 the appeal from the order are brought up for review and have been considered on the defendants' cross appeal from the judgment (see CPLR 5501[a][1] ; Matter of Aho, 39 N.Y.2d at 248, 383 N.Y.S.2d 285, 347 N.E.2d 647 ; Castle Restoration & Constr., Inc. v. Castle Restoration, LLC, ––– A.D.3d ––––, ––– N.Y.S.3d ––––, 2017 WL 1240175 [Appellate Division Docket Nos.2015–06517, 2015–06584; decided herewith] ).
DILLON, J.P., LEVENTHAL, COHEN and MILLER, JJ., concur.