Opinion
October 16, 1995
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Yoswein, J.).
Ordered that the appeal from the order dated May 11, 1994 is dismissed, as that order was superseded by the order dated May 18, 1994, made upon reargument; and it is further,
Ordered that the appeal from the orders dated April 20, 1994, May 18, 1994, and July 14, 1994, are dismissed; and it is further,
Ordered that the appeal from the judgment entered April 3, 1995, is dismissed as that judgment was superseded by the amended judgment entered August 15, 1995, and it is further,
Ordered that the amended judgment is affirmed insofar as appealed and cross-appealed from; and it is further,
Ordered that the respondent-appellant and the nonparty respondents appearing separately and filing separate briefs are awarded one bill of costs.
The appeals from the intermediate orders dated April 20, 1994, May 18, 1994, and July 14, 1994, must be dismissed because the right of direct appeal therefrom terminated with the entry of the amended judgment in the action (see, Matter of Aho, 39 N.Y.2d 241, 248). The issues raised on appeal from the orders are brought up for review and have been considered on the appeal from the amended judgment (CPLR 5501 [a] [1]).
While the defendants seek, among other things, modification of the final judgment in the plaintiff's favor, contending that they had substantiated various items which should have been credited against her award, we agree with the trial court that these claims were not sufficiently proven.
We have reviewed the parties' remaining contentions and find them either to be without merit or that no further relief is warranted. Thompson, J.P., Altman, Goldstein and Florio, JJ., concur.