Opinion
06-12-2015
Carol DURNEY, Plaintiff–Appellant, v. Peter J. McQUILLEN, Judith M. McQuillen, Defendants–Respondents, et al., Defendants.
Knauf Shaw LLP, Rochester (Amy K. Kendall of Counsel), for Plaintiff–Appellant. Bonarigo & McCutcheon, Batavia (Kristie L. Defreze of Counsel), for Defendants–Respondents.
Knauf Shaw LLP, Rochester (Amy K. Kendall of Counsel), for Plaintiff–Appellant.
Bonarigo & McCutcheon, Batavia (Kristie L. Defreze of Counsel), for Defendants–Respondents.
Opinion
MEMORANDUM:Plaintiff appeals from an order that, inter alia, granted in part the motion for summary judgment of defendants Peter J. McQuillen and Judith M. McQuillen. We affirm for reasons stated in the “ decision and order” of Supreme Court, and we write only to note that, under the circumstances presented, we decline to search the record to reach issues raised by defendants, who did not cross-appeal from the order (see Ginter v. Flushing Terrace, LLC, 121 A.D.3d 840, 845, 995 N.Y.S.2d 95 ; New York Univ. Hosp. Rusk Inst. v Government Empls. Ins. Co., 39 A.D.3d 832, 833, 835 N.Y.S.2d 612 ).
It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.SCUDDER, P.J., SMITH, SCONIERS, VALENTINO, and DeJOSEPH, JJ., concur.